The following are excerpts of content for the RadLimits petition initiative on enforcing state-wide limits on radiation from technology. If you have suggestions for improvement, please share. Your comments may not be posted as discussed here. However, just in case, please insert an asterisk (*) in front of your comment if you would like to have your comment publicly posted.
The wireless facility post lists additional enforcement measures here. However, this post shares how to address the issue more generally such as by utilizing the office of the attorney general. While getting the attorney general involved when industry fails to follow the law seems like a good idea, the more complicated question is how to get state government to comply if it chooses not to do so. Suggestions are welcome.
GENERIC EXAMPLE OF ENFORCEMENT FOR INDUSTRY
The attorney general shall enforce good faith compliance in this section through adjudication of complaints alleging such violations in accordance with chapter 93. This remedy shall not be exclusive and shall be in addition to all other causes of action and other remedies and penalties provided by law.
Question – Is there a way to expand this to insure penalties serve justice for those harmed and prevent further harm?
GENERIC EXAMPLE OF ENFORCEMENT FOR GOVERNMENT
The state shall establish a clear line of authority for executive enforcement of this law and a clear, swift and simple process for the public to file complaints with the respective authority. Complaints may be lodged by Massachusetts citizens who have a stake in the enforcement of the law. This process shall be public except where the complainant requests anonymity. The state shall have 60 days to respond regarding its intentions and reasonable timeline for any action. The failure of the state to respond in a manner that shows good faith intentions to enforce the law shall be grounds for the filing of a civil suit against the parties who have neglected to enforce the law.
Question – Can this be improved? This is a general overview, but needs details and potentially alternatives such as a state body outside the judicial system to review complaints, provision of community representation, specific public oversight rules, specific timelines, and specific penalties. Filing a civil suit is also quite expensive, and there is a question of whether standing exists, in that a suit generally must be based on evidence that an injury has occurred to a plaintiff as direct result of the defendant’s action. Often people who are ill from environmental exposure lack the energy to file a civil suit, and parties interested in filing a suit for preventative reasons or concerns are said to lack an injury and thus standing.