atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power | 04.2019
Transform your PDFs into Flipbooks and boost your revenue!
Leverage SEO-optimized Flipbooks, powerful backlinks, and multimedia content to professionally showcase your products and significantly increase your reach.
<strong>atw</strong> Vol. 64 (2019) | Issue 4 ı April<br />
“living law [flourishes and is not]<br />
imprisoned by the past” [18].<br />
It is the continual conflict between<br />
the dynamics of ‘stability’ and ‘change’<br />
which determines if a political or legal<br />
system will collapse in on itself, or if it<br />
will survive. Walker, et al., provides a<br />
line of inquiry regarding a bridging<br />
<strong>for</strong>ce <strong>for</strong> the ability of a stable system<br />
to successfully process change:<br />
“It is assumed that patterns of<br />
behavior will be more stable and<br />
enduring if they can be characterized<br />
as legitimate; that actors who have<br />
legitimacy attributed to them will<br />
be more able to induce compliance<br />
than those who do not share that<br />
attribute…” [19].<br />
3.2 The concept<br />
of legal legitimacy<br />
The search <strong>for</strong> legitimacy in any<br />
political system may be considered<br />
“the oldest problem of political<br />
theory” [20]. Given that a nuclear<br />
waste management program is expected<br />
to last <strong>for</strong> hundreds of years from<br />
inception to end of life, this search <strong>for</strong><br />
legitimacy when creating a nuclear<br />
power and waste management program<br />
is of great importance, as a<br />
citizen living under any political<br />
system must “have confidence in [the]<br />
administrative processes [found<br />
within that system], and [in the final<br />
outcome, be able to] respect and<br />
accept [those] decisions” [21].<br />
Each political system, whether<br />
democratic or authoritarian in nature,<br />
shares certain legal traditions, which<br />
provide it with legitimacy. These traditions<br />
not only entail a similarity of<br />
various institutions (e.g., parliament/<br />
legislature, courts, and administrative<br />
agencies) and processes, they encompass<br />
common core values, such as<br />
lawfulness, expertise, efficiency, and<br />
effectiveness [22].<br />
Because legitimacy is such an<br />
essential quality of the law, it is a<br />
subject that has, and continues to,<br />
preoccupy legal scholars [23]. Barnett<br />
argues law proceeds from two binding<br />
sources: (1) laws created through the<br />
people’s voice, though not all may<br />
agree, and (2) laws created where the<br />
State embarks on a course of action<br />
believing it is the best arbiter of what<br />
is appropriate without the full input<br />
of such non-consenting persons [24].<br />
Barnett’s model rests upon the precept<br />
that any government is established,<br />
and endowed, with powers of<br />
competencies to do what is required<br />
in fashioning the legal structure <strong>for</strong><br />
executing the desired undertaking<br />
and is sufficiently broad in its scope to<br />
encompass the similarities shared <strong>for</strong><br />
rule making by both democratic and<br />
authoritarian regimes. This is that the<br />
primary reason <strong>for</strong> any government,<br />
as a function of its political system, is<br />
to fashion a framework <strong>for</strong> what is<br />
deemed by that system as necessary<br />
and proper <strong>for</strong> initiating, building,<br />
financing and operating a civilian<br />
nuclear power and/or nuclear waste<br />
management program.<br />
A central notion that <strong>for</strong>ms the<br />
core of the concept of legitimacy is<br />
the way a political system establishes<br />
procedures “<strong>for</strong> law-making and<br />
implementation [that appear to<br />
the beholder] as acceptable, i.e., appropriate<br />
and binding” [25]. The<br />
highest ideal <strong>for</strong> any nation state<br />
should<br />
be<br />
to promulgate laws, statutes, regulations,<br />
and rules in a transparent, fair,<br />
and equitable system. However, it is<br />
respected that the world’s myriad of<br />
intricate political systems each have<br />
their own unique complexities, which<br />
are acted upon by enormous pressure<br />
from numerous interest groups,<br />
leaving one to question one’s personal<br />
consent granted to the governing<br />
body within any system of government.<br />
This raises questions regarding the<br />
ability of access by individuals to a<br />
political/legal system, and its assurance<br />
that individual rights and/or<br />
concerns have been considered and<br />
protected. For citizens living under an<br />
authoritarian system of government,<br />
the anxiety arises whether the governing<br />
body has considered the inherent<br />
needs of the citizenry throughout the<br />
decision-making and administrative<br />
process, more so than with matters of<br />
consent, as consent is implied. Within<br />
both systems, the administrative process<br />
initiates similar concerns given<br />
that all bureaucratic systems do not<br />
provide <strong>for</strong> political accountability of<br />
these unelected individuals with<br />
expansive powers and “[with] the<br />
public lack[ing the necessary] tools<br />
| | Fig. 2.<br />
Milestone Demarcation <strong>for</strong> “Change” in a <strong>Nuclear</strong> <strong>Power</strong> & Waste Management Program.<br />
DECOMMISSIONING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 223<br />
Decommissioning and Waste Management<br />
A World’s Dilemma ‘Upon Which the Sun Never Sets’: The <strong>Nuclear</strong> Waste Management Strategy: Russia, Asia and the Southern Hemisphere Part I ı Mark Callis Sanders and Charlotta E. Sanders