WORLD COURT DECISION ON NEW ZEALAND NUCLEAR TESTING CASE

New Zealand had argued that conducting the tests would be in breach of international law relating to protection of the marine environment. It had also sought orders from the Court that the current round of tests be suspended pending the hearing of its case. A majority 12-3 held that New Zealand could not re-open the 1973 case as it was about atmospheric testing, while the current test series is being conducted underground.

This decision should in no way be seen as an endorsement of French nuclear testing - the Court did not look at this issue.

Both Australia and New Zealand acknowledged from the outset that these proceedings faced formidable procedural hurdles. Nevertheless, we are pleased that New Zealand was able to raise in such a prominent forum, in a very forceful way, the serious concern that countries of the Pacific have about the environmental risks of French nuclear tests. It was also significant that New Zealand was able to draw the French into appearing before the Court to answer the case of environmental damage. New Zealand made a telling and credible case against French testing.

By applying to intervene in support of the New Zealand case, Australia and four other countries of the Pacific have demonstrated their commitment to opposing the resumption of nuclear tests in the region and put on the record their views on the important questions of international environmental responsibility raised by the New Zealand case.

Australia will, of course, continue to do what ever it can to apply pressure on the French government to reverse its decision to resume testing. In that regard, we will now focus our efforts in the International Court of Justice on mounting Australia's oral argument on the test issue in the hearing on the Advisory Opinions sought by the World Health Organisation and the UN General Assembly on the legality of use of nuclear weapons. That is scheduled to take place on 30 October.

SINGAPORE