Legal challenges to Trident

There will be three court cases this week dealing with the legality of British nuclear weapons.

The most significant of these is a judicial review into the decision by the Environment Agency to allow nuclear waste discharges from Aldermaston. It will be argued that these discharges should not have been permitted because there is no justification for Trident. This will be at the High Court in London from 13th to 15th September.

The trial of two women who swam onto a Trident submarine starts in Liverpool on 11th September. This is a retrial after their initial trial collapsed.

There will also be a preliminary hearing at the High Court of Judiciary in Edinburgh for the Lord Advocates Reference following the acquittal by Sheriff Margaret Gimblett of three women in October 1999. This will take place on Wednesday 13th September.

High Court Challenge to Trident Warheads

Wednesday 13th September 2000 09.30am
The Royal Courts of Justice, The Strand, London

A legal case challenging the UK Government's continued manufacture of Trident warheads will take place at the High Court, London on 13th - 15th September 2000. Two applicants, a local resident and a pressure group, have been granted permission for a judicial review.

The basis of the applicants' case is that the Environment Agency acted unlawfully in granting authorisations for radioactive discharges to AWE Plc (a consortium of BNFL, SERCO and Lockheed Martin) for the Atomic Weapons Establishments at Aldermaston and Burghfield near Reading in Berkshire.

"We argue that the Environment Agency had to carry out a proper justification exercise in accordance with the Euratom Treaty. We are pleased to note that the Secretary of State for Defence believes this is a point that should be referred to the European Court of Justice." Phil Shiner, Solicitor

There is enormous public interest in this decision given that these are the sites of manufacture and servicing of Trident warheads. Although the Environment Agency has decided that radioactive discharges are safe, the public is concerned that past, present and future discharges from AWE accumulate. They contaminate the environment and pose a long-term threat to public health.

" Why has a proper justification not been provided for radioactive discharges from Aldermaston and Burghfield? And why did the Environment Agency not examine the justification for themselves?" Pam Vassie for the Nuclear Awareness Group (NAG )

"According to the Environment Agency's decision document, 45% of alpha discharges to air from AWE Aldermaston are caused by the continuing production of Trident. It is now time to concentrate on cleaning up this site. We need the government to publish a timetable to reach ZERO DISCHARGES." Pam Vassie for NAG

" I'm not convinced that the Environment Agency has taken into account the concerns of people who actually live near the Atomic Weapons factory." Emanuela Machiori, peace campaigner

The Applicants are aware that Aldermaston is a very dangerous site and will remain so for many years. They wish to see an end to the creation of nuclear discharges and waste, with a legally regulated programme of decommissioning over a time-scale governed by public health and safety, rather than military, financial or political considerations.