CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 14 (2023) following decades, a number of other (both nuclear and non-nuclear) states either ratified 18 , or acceded. 19 The fact is that the states of Western Europe have never joined the international regime of nuclear liability, as established under the Vienna Convention and have, until today, remained to be governed by a parallel existing international regime of nuclear liability, as established under the Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy (thereinafter “the Paris Convention”) 20 and – more recently – under the new regime of liability under the Protocol to Amend the Paris Convention (thereinafter: “the Revised Paris Convention”). 21 On the contrary, the Vienna Convention did attract the states of Central and Eastern Europe, which acceded to it en masse after the collapse of the Iron Curtain. At the same time, the Vienna Convention has never attracted the accession of major nuclear states, such as the United States, Canada, South Africa, China, Japan and India. Six decades after its adoption, there are more than four dozen states 22 worldwide participating at the regime of the Vienna Convention. Some other states are participating at the liability regime, established by the revised version of the Vienna Convention (thereinafter: “the Revised Vienna Convention”), which was established by the Protocol to Amend the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage. 23 Both these “Viennese” regimes – those established by the Vienna Convention and those established by the Revised Vienna Convention – recently co-exist in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Further, alongside the Vienna Convention, the International Conference on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage also adopted an Optional Protocol Concerning a Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention (thereinafter “the Optional Protocol”). 24 The Optional Protocol provides for the compulsory resolution of disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of the Vienna Convention by the International Court of Justice or, if the parties to the dispute agree, by arbitration or conciliation. Currently, however, there are only two Contracting Parties to this Protocol. 25 The 60 th anniversary since the adoption of the Vienna Convention represents a salient opportunity to evaluate whether the Convention has achieved its original goal. Having 18 E.g. Chile and Lebanon. 19 Bolivia, Brazil, Cameroon, Jordan, Mauritius, Mexico, Niger, Nigeria, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Senegal, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay. 20 The Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy (adopted 29 July 1960), as amended by the Additional Protocol of 1964 (adopted 28 January 1964, entered into force on 1 April 1968) and by the Protocol of 1982 (adopted 16 November 1982, entered into force on 7 October 1988). 21 The Protocol to Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy of 29 July 1960 as amended by the Additional Protocol of 28 January 1964 and by the Protocol of 16 November 1982 (adopted 12 February 2004, entered into force on 1 January 2022). 22 Argentina, Armenia, Belarus, Bolivia, Bosna and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Chile, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Egypt, Estonia, Ghana, Hungary, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and Grenada, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Ukraine and Uruguay. 23 The Protocol to Amend the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage (adopted 12 Sept., 1997, entered into force 4 Oct., 2003), INFCIRC/566. 24 Optional Protocol Concerning a Compulsory Settlement of Disputes to the Vienna Convention (adopted 21 May 1963, entered into force 13 April 1999), INFCIRC/500/add.3. 25 Philippines and Uruguay.

300