Space Treaty Research Articles

Outer space weaponisation: International security and Nigeria in the outer space

Outer Space could be seen extensively threatened by the inability of States to universalize commitments against conduct of destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite missile tests, and placement of dual-use nature of space-based capabilities which further aggravate outer Space weaponisation through the presence of over 170 million pieces of debris in orbit, causing collision, damages and outright loss of space assets to developing Space fairing nations like Nigeria. It was against this background that this study adopts Liberal Institutionalism to examine outer Space Weaponisation, and international Security on developing nations. The study deconstructed space weaponisation into implications on Nigeria space assets and adoptable strategies to improve Nigeria’s assets in the outer space. Findings from the study established the nexus between space weaponization and space insecurity, which ultimately trigger the failure of Nigeria’s NIGCOMSAT-1, increasing cost of launching, maintaining space assets and causing apprehension in the global community. This study also situates the possibility of stronger nations blocking developing State’s access to space know-how and making space access development by developing countries like Nigeria very expensive and out of reach. This study therefore recommends that due to the presence of ideological and doctrinal difference among the veto wielding permanent members on the use of outer space, Nigeria should join forces with other nations that oppose weaponization of space and accordingly spearhead the drive towards a stricter new space treaty banning the testing, deployment and use of all kinds of intentional, harmful, and dual use weapons in space. That Nigeria should devote an accountable proportion of her GDP between 2-4% to space-related programmes in order to generate and develop scientific and technological capacities as by-products that would enhance national development.

New Perspectives for the Making of Space Law: UNIDROIT’s Cape Town Approach Compared with Traditional UNCOPUOS Law-Making

The United Nations Committee for the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UN and UNCOPUOS) drafted the five outer space treaties in little more than a decade and created a completely new specialisation in international law. This, of course, happened when states and state agencies were the only participants in the use and exploration of outer space. Since then, new non-governmental actors have entered the space market, aspects of which were privatised and commercialised. Yet, despite the pressing need for international legislation, since 1979 UNCOPUOS has proved incapable of producing another treaty on space law. The author examines why the UNCOPUOS, established to make international law of outer space, stopped making outer space treaties and how the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (Institute International pour l’unification du Droit Privé or UNIDROIT), a non-UN entity established to unify private law, created its 2012 Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters Specific to Space Assets (Space Protocol), what is allegedly the first outer space treaty in (then) thirty-two years. The UNCOPUOS system of public international law treaty-making is compared with the UNIDROIT private international law one, and the question of whether UNIDROIT has created a new method of treaty-making is addressed. The conclusions are that a functioning space law regime exists, hard law is preferable to non-binding soft law, UNCOPUOS cannot produce any further outer space treaties, the Space Protocol can only form part of space law if one accepts a fourth stage of development of space law as part of a redefining of space law sensu lato, UNIDROIT’s Cape Town Approach is more suitable to modern space law treaty-making, and treaty-drafting is a special art of the international lawyer.

PRIORITIZING HEALTH CONCERNS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EQUALLY IN ADDRESSING SPACE DEBRIS FROM OUTER SPACE THROUGH THE PRINCIPLE OF INTEGRATION OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The controversy surrounding space debris which have re-entered the earth atmosphere has gained prominence for causing environmental contamination among various subsidiary guidelines which constitute the Guidelines for the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities. Regretfully, most of the subsidiary guidelines have barely referred to health concerns explicitly. While certain forms of space debris can either cause air, water or ground pollution such as fuel from fuel tanks of rockets and satellites or nuclear-powered reactors, how human health is affected has been downplayed. If sustainable development must be achieved, the inclusion of health concerns from space debris must be emphasized as more non-space-faring states are victims of fallen debris that could harm their population. Therefore, the main objective of this research is to assert that environmental contamination and health concerns arising from the space debris left on earth from the outcome of outer space activities must be given equal emphasis in the furtherance on international health law. This is a qualitative study that utilizes a textual analysis in interpreting provisions and relevant paragraphs of selected outer space agreements and soft law documents to identify wordings such as environmental contamination and pollution, health and public health to judge if these documents have adequately addressed the two components of sustainable development. Secondary resources were also consulted. The results of the study show that outer space law has made some strides by embracing sustainable development with an emphasis on environmental contamination and protection from space debris through non-binding soft law documents to complement outer space treaties but neglecting health concerns. The implication is the need to develop international health law by the World Health Organization (WHO) concerning outer space to address toxic fuels besides the hazards posed by nuclear reactors powering some satellites since scant attention has been given to these matters.

Outer Space: The Final Frontier of Taxation

As the pace of commercial space exploration quickens, the question arises: is the global tax framework equipped to handle the complexities tied to revenues from outer space? The very nature of these revenues, derived from a deemed sovereign-free source, clashes with traditional tax principles like the source and residence doctrines. While the Outer Space Treaty, accepted by the majority of countries, bars any claims of sovereignty in space and complicates taxation, countries like the United States and Luxembourg have introduced domestic laws granting their residents rights over resources retrieved from space. Additionally, emerging space industries bring to light challenges in areas such as transfer pricing and satellite taxation, highlighting the pressing need for international consensus on these intricate tax matters.

The Final Frontier: responsibility of international organizations for outer space activities

The responsibility of international organizations for internationally wrongful acts is by no means a field of international law that is ruled by consensus even on the level of the most basic norms of responsibility. This confusion is even more prevalent when an international organization acts in outer space. International law applicable for outer space activity is sometimes regarded as lexspecialis to general norms of responsibility without much further considerations. The aim of this contribution is to examine whether this statement has merit, in light of the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention and the Articles of the Responsibility of International Organizations drafted by the International Law Commission. Based on a theoretical analysis––due to the lack of practice––, it can be concluded, that the joint and several responsibility regime created by the Outer Space Treaty, and the liability and––at the same time––international responsibility system of the Liability Convention are indeed lex specialis and this responsibility is by default shared in nature. This conclusion is valid only for damage caused by illegal space activity by space objects on the surface of the Earth and to aircraft in flight.

Tanggung Jawab Negara Peluncur Terhadap Pengelolaan Sampah Antariksa Dalam Kerangka Hukum Internasional

This research discusses the responsibilities of launching states in the management of space debris within the framework of International law. The advancement of technology has given rise to a new form of technology known as space technology, or commonly referred to as human-made space objects. The presence of these space objects has had a positive impact on human life on Earth, but it has also undeniably created new challenges in the form of environmental changes in outer space due to the accumulation of space debris resulting from space activities. With an increasing number of human-made space objects being launched into space, there is a risk of space debris accumulation in Earth's orbit, potentially threatening the safety and sustainability of space activities. Currently, there is no specific international regulation governing the management of space debris, which can lead to ambiguity in the responsibilities of states regarding space debris management. Therefore, this research employs a normative approach by examining various legal documents related to space activities, with a focus on the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Uses of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 1967 (Outer Space Treaty 1967) and the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (Liability Convention 1972). The objective of this research is to determine whether states bear responsibility for the management of space debris.

Legal considerations on a regional security organization for planetary defence

Under the UN-Charter system, the maintenance of international peace and security is traditionally the primary responsibility of the UN Security Council as set forth in Chapter VII. Since the Security Council's competence for dealing with matters of international peace and security is not exclusive, other international bodies may take a role in addressing threats emanating from outer space. A regional security organization for planetary defence can be established under Article 52 UN-Charter and may provide for an alternative forum to decide upon the necessary steps for Near Earth Object (NEO)-deflection missions. The international legal personality of an international organization for planetary defence leads to the capacity of entering into treaties, the international responsibility for acts and omissions attributed to it and the enjoyment of privileges and immunities. Such organization can also declare acceptance of the UN Space Treaties.

Pros and Cons of Data Pricing and Access Policies

The sharing of benefits of space activities is a principle that is repeated throughout several legal instruments that regulate outer space as a key principle. These legal instruments offer very little guidance in how to interpret this principle and what the scope of its corresponding obligation is. Considering the shift to privatization and commercialization of space activities, defining this principle becomes ever more pressing to be able to assess and solve the discrepancy between legal obligations and contemporary developments in the use of space. The supply and use of Earth Observation (EO) data provides a particularly fertile case study to illustrate this. Different pricing policies are analysed with particular regard for the benefit principle, but also taking into account the interests of commercial and private actors as participants of a developing EO data market. Currently, there is no definite consistency in pricing and access policies. To secure this balance between the needs of the EO data market and the obligation that the benefits principle holds, a binding international regulation on EO data access, pricing and further (re)distribution could offer the consistency and stability the commercial EO data market needs to mature while also protecting social and scientific interests. Earth Observation, EO, data pricing policies, open data policies, benefits, New Space, outer space, law, principles, Outer Space Treaty

우주자원 활용과 우주법 체계

This study analyzes the issues in the international space law system related to the utilization of space resources and examines the views of states to consider the implications of changes in the space law system. One of the key issues at stake is how to interpret the non-appropriation principle provision in Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which states that the outer atmosphere, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation. In this regard, scholars have generally explained that Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty precludes the assertion of sovereign rights and private ownership over outer space and celestial bodies. However, the situation has recently changed with the United States, Luxembourg, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Japan enacting domestic legislation to recognize the possession and use of space resources, and the international community has begun to discuss space resource activities. The Artemis Accords seems to have also played a role in this discussion. Meanwhile, a number of scholarly opinions have emerged that the meaning of Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty is unclear and difficult to determine. Various discussions are underway, and the issues are summarized as follows. (1) According to the structure and wording of the Outer Space Treaty, it is difficult to determine whether a sign is included; (2) It is difficult to determine whether a private entity that is subject to state authorization and supervision can engage in appropriation; (3) The different wording of the Chinese version of the Outer Space Treaty is one of the problems to be solved; (4) There is also a debate on whether space and its resources are public goods. (5) Questions remain as to whether private entities were considered in the preparatory documents for Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty. (6) It is difficult to say that the principle of non-appropriation has become customary law. The UN COPOUS established a working group to address the issue of space resources and asked for the views of States, and some States have responded, among which the views on the non-appropriation principle in Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty can be observed. First, there is a view that the space law system neither affirms nor prohibits the appropriation of space resources. Second, there are views that there is a gap in the space law regime and that the Outer Space Treaty could be supplemented by the Artemis Agreement. Third, there is a neutral view that there are gaps in the space law system and that new legal norms are needed. Fourth, some interpret space law as denying the appropriation of space resources whatsoever. Fifth, there are views that point to or are based on the inconsistency of current state practice with the Outer Space Treaty and the normative framework.

Framing The Responsibility of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) on Space Technology in International Law

Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) have gained popularity as a way to use resources and expertise from the private sector to support governmental space activities. In the event of a space-related incident, the division of duties and liabilities between public and private partners may be complicated. Clarifying the division of duties and liabilities between public and private actors is necessary given the rising participation of private companies in space activities.. With the growing involvement of private entities in space activities, there is a need to clarify the allocation of responsibilities and liabilities between public and private actors. Who is held responsible when a private company causes a technological disaster strike? On what basis can the responsibility be made, understood from international law? The research is normative legal research, where the data is collected through a statutory and case approach. The study results show that Public-private partnerships (PPPs) in outer space activities raise complex questions regarding responsibility. Responsibility refers to the Liability Convention on the Outer Space Treaty. The treaty emphasizes that states bear international responsibility for their national activities in outer space, including those conducted by private entities under their jurisdiction. However, the treaty does not explicitly address the specific responsibilities of private actors. Private companies only bear indirect international responsibility. PPPs need to consider the notion of shared responsibility, which acknowledges the contributions of both public and private actors and emphasizes cooperation and transparency

Competitive observance by the Russian Federation and the USA of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty

Introduction. Thе Russian Federation and the USA, being parties to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, in their national legal acts refer to this source. Each of these states recognizes that the 1967 Outer Space regime is to be perfected, while having different legal outer space policy. The USA is a leader of the military outer space infrastructure and of creation national outer space legislation and separate international agreements (“The Artemis Accords”), thus imposing its own track to develop the 1967 Treaty.Materials and methods. This research addresses relevant international documents on international space law as well as acts of national legislation pertaining to the topic. Research results. In modern political conditions the quality of a state defense and its economic development is linked to the efficiency of the outer space infrastructure, including communication and reconnaissance satellites. While the U.S. intends to achieve military supremacy in the outer space, the 1967 Treaty seems to be a barrier to such intention although the U.S. provides its own interpretation of the Treaty. Another significant area of competition between Russia and USA in the outer space legal policy is the observance of the natural resources treaty provisions. According to the USA, a state is entitled unilaterally exploit the space resources, and its persons are entitled to commercial use of such resources based on national law. This position of the United States resulted in creation of its national legislation opportunities for natural resources activities in outer space. The Russian Federation continues to defend multilateral approach to the exploitation of space resources and to call upon strictly observance of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. There are also competitive legal positions of the USA and Russia relating to the notion of “common province of mankind” provided by the 1967 Treaty.The main results. In this context, the paper after providing prolegomena to the competitive principle in international law, suggests some theoretical ideas for perfecting of the legal position of the Russian Federation as a response to the modern outer space legal policy of the USA.Discussion and conclusions. In the legal literature on this issue different views are assessed – from a radical rejection of the US model of behavior and continuation of efforts to strengthen the 1967 Treaty regime, to proposals to adopt a new national Russian legislation providing rights of persons to exploit the natural resources of celestial bodies, thus provid-ing incentives for private investors. This track leads to more competition with the USA, observing at the same time the 1967 Treaty as the “corpus juris specialis”.

Outer Space Exploration and the Sustainability of the Space Environment – An Uneasy Relationship

In contrast with the early years of space flight that were dominated by the political priorities and military concerns of the two superpowers, the USA and the then Soviet Union, a new space era has dawned where not only states are involved as serious actors in the space arena, but also private companies. Because of the significant increase in the number of space actors, outer space is becoming a congested and competitive environment. It is self-evident that the significant increase in private and state-sponsored space ventures has serious implications for the protection and sustainability of the outer space environment. Specifically, the proliferation of space debris and the current lack of protection of vulnerable scientific, historical, and cultural sites on celestial bodies are issues of concern. Several measures to balance the seemingly competing interests of space exploration and the sustainability of the space environment have been suggested. This article aims to discuss these measures and to assess to what extent they are in conformity with the current outer space governance regime. It is concluded that the measures suggested to actively address the space debris problem and to protect the cultural heritage in space may contravene the Outer Space Treaty, especially the rules and prohibitions regarding property rights in space. Moreover, whilst the removal of orbital debris is essential to ensure the sustainable use of the outer space environment, some space junk may have cultural significance and be worthy of protection. A balance should thus be struck between preserving cultural heritage and managing the risks posed by space debris. It is therefore recommended that the development of interim soft-law rules (and an eventual treaty) should be undertaken under the auspices of existing United Nations bodies, namely the UNCOPUOS and UNESCO.

Privacy in the age of remote sensing during natural disasters in Australia and Indonesia

Satellites are increasingly used for remote sensing, aiding in disaster management, however they also raise privacy concerns. Despite the existence of international instruments such as the Outer Space Treaty, Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space and International Charter Space and Major Disasters, there are no specific rules addressing satellite misuse leading to privacy breaches during natural disasters. This article examines the existing legal frameworks for satellite regulation and privacy in Australia and Indonesia, two disaster-prone countries, with the aim of determining their adequacy for addressing privacy concerns arising from satellite use during natural disasters. By conducting a comparative analysis of both legal frameworks vis-à-vis relevant international law, this article highlights the gaps that affect their applicability and effectiveness. It finds that international rules on the use of satellites for remote sensing activities generally lack binding force, and do not address the issue of privacy breaches resulting from satellite misuse. Both countries also lack specific legal frameworks addressing privacy breaches caused by satellite misuse during disasters. It recommends that in the absence of unequivocal and specific provisions under international law, both countries could review and rely on their national legal frameworks to address potential privacy issues due to advancing remote sensing capabilities. The provision of Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty requires states to authorise and ensure continued supervision of activities of non-governmental entities in outer space. This provision could be relied on to impose, through the instrumentality of domestic laws, restrictions, or conditions on space activities, including privacy provisions. Existing space legislation requiring liability insurance could also be extended to include privacy provisions.

SUSTAINABILITY OF SPACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT – ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF ORBITAL DEBRIS IN THE CONTEXT OF SPACE LIABILITY

The problem of managing space debris is not only an international challenge but also an opportunity to preserve this environment for future space exploration missions. As more countries gain the technology and economic means to launch spacecraft, more focus is being exerted on standardizing the procedures of each country and on adhering to new developing norms under international agreements. Over time, the increasing number of launching states proves that space debris mitigation will have to be coordinated and that preventive measures across all stakeholders – both state and non-state actors – will have to be put in place since if one actor fails to do so, this may inevitably affect all others. The article focuses on the analysis of international space law and policy steps undertaken to tackle environmental pollution in outer space, in particular in terms of accumulation of human-made debris and waste material in the Earth’s orbit and beyond. The aim of the work is to analyse to what extent the international legal framework and policy measures are failing in addressing the emerging issue of debris in outer space and to propose policy recommendations in creating a new specialized international organization along with de lege ferenda conclusions for international space law, especially in the context of possible amendments to the Liability Convention and the Outer Space Treaty.

SOME LEGAL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL LIABILITY FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY MALFUNCTIONING OF SATELLITE NAVIGATION SYSTEMS

International liability is one of the most difficult legal issues related to satellite navigation applications. The 1972 Liability Convention provides that a launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space objects on the surface of the Earth or to aircraft flight, and liable for damage due to its fault in space. The legal situation of artificial satellites, including navigation satellites, is determined by their assignment to space objects. Unfortunately, the term “space object” is also not specifically defined in international space law. The main purpose of this article is to determine whether damage caused by satellite navigation systems can be covered by the Liability Convention, whether the Convention refers only to direct physical damage resulting from the fall or collision of space objects or whether it also encompasses damage resulting from the malfunctioning of a navigation space object and intangible electromagnetic waves. It seems that the present regulations of the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention do not apply to satellite navigation and do not cover the damage caused by navigation’s intangible signals. Unfortunately, it is rather clear that the international community is unlikely to adopt uniform rules on liability for satellite navigation signals in the near future. However, the United Nations and its Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space remain to be the best platform to work on establishing the principles governing the issue of liability for damage caused by malfunctioning of satellite navigation systems and their signals.

Monopolies in Outer Space: Is Europe Ready?

The liberalization of outer space in the past decades has given birth to a new market, one of crucial significance to our everyday lives. However, this new reality has created a situation where the goals of the Space Treaties are subjected to the fluctuations of market forces. An international Competition Law framework could prove indispensable in safeguarding space activities from abuse, but its fragmentation leaves such a task down to national administrations. Despite that, at the national level there exists no competition law dedicated to space activities; the latter are subject to antitrust provisions sometimes even predating the birth of the space market. Against this backdrop, the present article will attempt to examine the aptitude of the European competition framework to effectively regulate space activities with a focus on the antimonopoly provision of Article 102 TFEU. Antitrust, Competition Law, EU Law, Space Market, TFEU 102

Acceding to the Moon Agreement to acquire legal certainty: An optional solution for China in the new era of lunar exploration and exploitation

Lunar exploration and exploitation have thrived in recent years due to advancements in space technology and the increasing demand for better utilization of the moon. These activities fall within the realm of outer space activities, mainly governed by international space treaties. However, lunar exploration, especially resource exploitation, is challenging to conduct at the moment under a definitive and generally acknowledged space treaty. The Moon Agreement, as the specific international space treaty addressing these activities, is not currently functioning well. Inspired by the US, several nations opposed to the Moon Agreement have chosen to enact national legislation to address the legal uncertainty. The US has initiated international accords unilaterally in an attempt to establish standards for rules on lunar exploration and exploitation, which has generated significant influence. As one of the major players in this arena, China must face this competitive situation and assume responsibility for establishing a harmonious environment for lunar exploration and exploitation. Instead of emulating the US approach and getting entangled in the competition of rule-making, China should consider accession to the Moon Agreement as a means to attain legal certainty, not only for its own requirements but also to contribute to the realization of international cooperation through space treaties adopted by the United Nations to the fullest extent.

Falling Stars and Sinking Ships: How Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty Needs Maritime Law

Falling Stars and Sinking Ships: How Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty Needs Maritime Law

Liability of launching state on space tourism

Current use of space as one of the economic factors supporting the country’s economic has experienced a very significant increase. The Treaty Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Outer Space Treaty 1967) stipulate that every activity carried out in space must be in accordance with the United Nations charter and must always maintain peace and security. one of the developing commercial activities is space tourism. This research is a normative legal research with a statutory and conceptual approach. The technique of gathering legal material is carried out by reviewing related literature and analyzing various legal references relevant to the problem under study for further analysis qualitatively and descriptively. This article will examine in depth related to whether the existing space law conventions are still relevant to regulating space tourism activities nowadays? And how the launcher state liability in the event of space tourism accidents?. This article conclude that some the existing space law conventions are still relevant to regulating space tourism activities nowadays. And the launcher state liability are divided into two aspects. Based on liability convention and warswa convention. This is because space tourism activity use two types of aerospace.

The intersection of space law and maritime security: Regulatory challenges and opportunities

This paper delves into the fascinating intersection of space law and maritime security, uncovering several new regulatory challenges and opportunities. With increasing reliance on outer space for maritime security, appropriate regulation is crucial to address legal ambiguities and conflicts. The study critically analyzes the key legal instruments governing the maritime environment and outer space, namely the Space Treaty of 1967 and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), pinpointing their overlaps and gaps. The existing frameworks fall short, and the swift advances in space-based technologies used for maritime security necessitate regulatory reform. The paper concludes with recommendations to enhance and align the existing legal frameworks to better suit the evolving interspace-maritime operations.