168彩票 - 168彩票

来源：168彩票2023-07-19 17:48

168彩票

中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******

　　中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。

资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。

　　2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。

　　日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。

　　日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。

　　事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。

　　因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。

　　日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。

　　《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。

　　德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。

　　日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。

　　国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。

　　太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。

　　Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business

　　By John Lee

　　(ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.

　　Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.

　　The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

　　On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.

　　The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.

　　In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.

　　Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.

　　The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.

　　The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.

　　The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.

　　According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.

　　As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.

　　However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.

　　Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.

　　The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.

　　If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.

用人单位自订“土规定”解聘员工为何违法******

　　近日，北京二中院披露了一起劳动纠纷案，用人单位以员工张某绩效考核不合格为由，与其解除劳动合同。法院判决公司属于违法解除，双方应继续履行劳动合同。(澎湃新闻1月31日)

　　根据现行法律法规，用人单位解雇员工，必须符合特定条件。劳动合同法规定，只有劳动者“在试用期间被证明不符合录用条件”“严重违反用人单位的规章制度”“严重失职，营私舞弊，给用人单位造成重大损害”等六种情形下，用人单位才可以单方解除劳动合同。此外，在劳动者“不能胜任工作，经过培训或者调整工作岗位，仍不能胜任工作”等三种情形下，用人单位虽然也能解雇员工，但必须“提前三十日以书面形式通知劳动者本人或者额外支付劳动者一个月工资”。

　　严格的法律条款，保护了劳动者的基本权益。但也有一些用人单位试图用“小动作”绕过法律规定。其中，自定一份内部规章制度，将绩效考核结果与员工去留实行挂钩，是很常见的做法。这些单位一旦遇到员工考核结果不达标的情况，就可能以“严重违反用人单位的规章制度”“不能胜任工作”为由，将员工“炒鱿鱼”。

　　北京二中院披露的这起纠纷也是如此。涉案用人单位早早制订了自己的绩效管理办法，规定企业有权对考核结果为待改进的员工予以解聘处理，无须支付任何补偿或赔偿。乍看上去，解聘当事员工，似乎是企业依规行事。但在法院看来，企业自订的“土规定”并不能改变这种行为的违法属性。

　　根据劳动合同法，用人单位在制定、修改或者决定直接涉及劳动者切身利益的规章制度或者重大事项时，应当经职工代表大会或者全体职工讨论，提出方案和意见，与工会或者职工代表平等协商确定，而不能自行其是，不把员工利益放在眼里。劳动立法之所以如此设计，正是为了避免用人单位自定“霸王条款”，侵犯劳动者权益。

　　一个用人单位，对员工最严厉的处罚，莫过于解聘开除。绩效考核反映的是员工工作实绩，并不能与劳动者违反用人单位规章制度混为一谈。一个绩效考核不合格的员工，就算“不胜任工作”，法律也规定了“挽救措施”，要求先“进行培训或者调整其工作岗位”，这也体现了法律以人为本的温度。

　　在这起纠纷中，员工张某既没有严重违反用人单位的规章制度，也没有犯多大的过错，给用人单位造成多重的损失，入职后若干年的表现，也都在“合格线”以上。数次考核结果为“待改进”，直接就“一棒子打死”，砸掉养家糊口的饭碗，于情于理于法，都说不过去。

　　基于现实生活的丰富性、立法的抽象性，任何法律条款都不可能穷尽一切现象，劳动立法也是如此。但保护劳动者合法权益，从来不是一句空话。在这起劳动纠纷案件中，法院通过掷地有声的司法判决，明确员工考核不合格不是解除劳动合同的充分理由，为用人单位划定了一条清晰的法治红线，张扬了从严保护劳动者权益的立法精神。(中国青年报刘婷婷)

　　（文图：赵筱尘巫邓炎）

[责编：天天中]

阅读剩余全文（）