Non-appropriation Principle Research Articles

Assessing the Principle of Equitable Access versus Non-Appropriation in the Era of Mega-Constellations

In the 21st century, mega-constellations and interconnected satellite constellations deployed at various orbital altitudes, such as LEO, MEO, and GEO, with low Earth orbits (LEOs) being the most commonly used, have emerged as a trend, aiming to enhance the productivity and reduce the costs in space service delivery. The UNOOSA has noted the uncertainty in the exact number of satellites but conducted simulations based on a substantial sample, projecting a significant increase from the 2075 satellites recorded in orbit in 2018. This surge in the launch of mega-constellations poses profound challenges to existing international space laws, originally formulated with limited consideration for private space actors, who are increasingly engaging in space activities, particularly with the cost-effective utilization of mega-constellations. This study critically analyzes the compatibility of mega-constellations with the current international space laws by examining the applicability of mega-constellations concerning equitable access and the non-appropriation principle, addressing their potential occupation of substantial orbital spaces during activities, and analyzing whether the acquisition of orbital slot licenses violates these two principles. Following an in-depth analysis, this study proposes recommendations to amend the existing laws, aiming to resolve ambiguities and address emerging challenges. Recognizing the time-consuming process of amending international space laws, this study suggests practical recommendations for supplementary rules of the road, prompting reflection on the potential obsolescence of the current international space laws in the face of evolving space activities.

Space Mining

The Outer Space Treaty, the leading source of law for activities in space, has laid out various limitations and regulations regarding actions in space and how space can be used. One of these limitations is commonly referred to as the “non-appropriation principle.” The non-appropriation principle prohibits nations from making claims of sovereignty over celestial bodies in space. This presents a problem as the space industry continues to progress because it causes uncertainty regarding the meaning of appropriation, what is classified as a celestial body, what acts are allowed, and who specifically is prohibited from acting. This Comment identifies these problems and their potential solutions, specifically with the proposition of space mining in mind.

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.

Artemis Base Camp and Exploitation of Outer Space: Problems and The Needs of Legal Framework

NASA introduced the Artemis Program in 2017, consisting of several missions, such as establishing a permanent outpost called Artemis Base Camp and exercising commercial and non-commercial exploitation on the Moon. For the program to be carried out properly, the United States established a series of bilateral agreements with other countries, namely the Artemis Accords. One of the functions of the Accords is as the supporting legal instrument for the implementation of the Artemis Program. However, its implementation raised several legal problems related to the legality of establishing Artemis Base Camp and violations of the basic principles of space law related to activities. This paper will specifically discuss the legal issues arising from using the Artemis Accords as one of the supporting legal bases for the two Artemis Program activities, according to space law. This article argues that Artemis Base Camp falls within the definition of a station explained in the Outer Space Treaty and the Moon Agreement. Then, the construction does not violate the principle of non-appropriation in Article II of the Outer Space Treaty because it does not fulfill the three main components of appropriation activities. Although establishing the Artemis Base Camp and exploiting lunar resources for non-commercial purposes is permitted, a basic legal framework still needs to be established to regulate permanent outposts and the exploitation of lunar resource activities. A specific legal framework is needed to avoid multiple interpretations leading to legal uncertainty.

The Artemis Accords

The Artemis Accords (the Accords) reproduced below were signed on September 13, 2020, by the administrator of the U.S. space agency, NASA, and seven other space agencies. The intervening years since then have underscored their importance: they may give a boost to the development of the legal regime of outer space exploration and use as defined by the existing treaty framework, while supporting the U.S. interpretation of the non-appropriation principle, or they may upset the existing legal regime of Outer Space, leading to its fragmentation by abandoning multilateralism. This introductory note highlights those aspects of the Accords that may affect the edifice of the international law relating to Outer Space, even if the Accords themselves are not legally binding, as explained briefly below.

THE ARTEMIS ACCORDS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS IN OUTER SPACE

On 13 October 2020, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the representatives of eight other space-faring nations signed The Artemis Accords. The Accords is a set of 13 provisions to establish international collaboration on sustainable human exploration in outer space. The most controversial provision in the Accords is the provision in Section 10 that relates to exploiting space resources which is not inherent with Article II of The Outer Space Treaty and Article 11 of The Moon Agreement that will cause the implementation of the Artemis Accords may violate international law. The different interpretations in interpreting the provisions in Article II of The Outer Space Treaty raises questions related to property rights in outer space, especially on issues that are related to the extraction of natural resources. Is it part of the subject of the non-appropriation principle or not.

Právní režim přírodních zdrojů na nebeských tělesech

The aim of this article is to describe the legal regime of the natural resources of celestial bodies. In recent months and years, there has been an increase in debates regarding mining on the moon and asteroids. This article is dedicated to the analysis of the legal regime of such activities. In particular, whether such activities are possible from the point of view of international law, how they are regulated and what are the potential future developments in this area. The article offers an analysis and comparison of the legal regime governing the natural resources of celestial bodies based on the Outer Space Treaty and the Moon Agreement, respectively. The Moon Agreement is given special attention despite its limited international significance, and arguments are presented in favour of its possible recognition by more states in the future. In both cases, arguments are presented that the non-appropriation principle regarding the outer space and celestial bodies, as expressed in both international treaties, does not apply to the natural resources.

MISCELÁNEA: ¿HACIA UN CAMBIO DE PARADIGMA EN EL DERECHO DEL ESPACIO ULTRATERRESTRE?: LOS ACUERDOS ARTEMISA

The current state of development of outer space law faces significant challenges arising from new space exploration and exploitation activities. In this context, several States, under the auspices of the United States, signed in October 2020 the «Artemis Accords. Principles for cooperation in the civil exploration and use of the Moon, Mars, comets and asteroids for peaceful purposes». This paper examines the possible contribution of these Accords to the consolidation of a paradigm shift in the Law of Outer Space, especially in relation to two aspects. On the one hand, with respect to their own development, as they were adopted outside the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), the forum in which space law has historically been configured. Second, in relation to the legal regime of space resources, by consolidating an interpretation of the principle of non-appropriation that legitimizes their exploitation.

Reinventing treaty compliant ‘‘safety zones’’ in the context of space sustainability

This paper questions the concept of safety zones, tracing it to maritime and military law, in order to unpack its potential legal uses, applications and implications in the current context of the New Space economy. To achieve this, it starts by investigating the historical foundations of safety zones rooted in the Cold-War-era legal literature and then move on to a larger discussion of how such zones can be balanced with the non-appropriation principle. Then, this paper examines a number of legal analogies, as they appear in maritime law, aviation law as well as relevant examples in outer-space law. Lastly, it attempts to sketch the outline of a “solution” that identifies the criteria, to be used in order to model a potential safety zone that strikes a balance between the industry's growing concerns and requirements on one hand, and the legal prohibitions that preclude sovereign claims on outer space on the other hand. Particular attention is given to the special case of the United States’ extraterritorial jurisdiction in outer space.

Space cowboys and mankind’s devil advocates: Towards the sustainable development of space law

The commercialization of outer space has created new challenges for international law, aside from the traditional issues of demarcation and militarization. International norms that regulate space activities were adopted at a time when one could not imagine a private company being able to economically exploit space resources. The doctrine is divided between the supporters and opponents of the interpretation that allows for freedom of enterprise and ownership over space resources. The majority of states are prone to accept freedom of enterprise, limited by the interests of mankind and environmental protection. At the same time, except for states that allow for such a possibility through their internal laws, states are against ownership rights, believing that the non-appropriation principle is absolute. Economic exploitation is in accordance with the object and purpose of the Outer Space Treaty since it can undoubtedly benefit mankind. Ownership rights, however, are impossible to conceive under the existing legal framework. There is a need to reform the legal framework, if possible, through amendments to the Outer Space Treaty, although the more realistic avenue is through informal standards that would prevent the chaos of freedom to exploit outer space. The sustainable development of outer-space commercialization would, in the author?s opinion, encourage an internationally regulated economic initiative, which would not exclude freedom of access to space resources for every state.

Mars Colonization Plan: The Possibility And Scheme For Appropriation On Mars

In the dawn of space era, State-driven and monopolized the space activities. This was exacerbated by high cost, military interference and the uncertain possibilities of civilian use. Nevertheless, as space technology grew, the enormous benefits created by space activities gradually motivated private companies to spend more capital and to use space for commercial purposes. Recently, two major of private space firms, SpaceX and Mars One reportedly has released their mission to Mars in order to conducted Mars Colonization Plan. On the other hand, the Outer Space Treaty and the rest of Corpus Juris Spatialis clearly prohibits to do appropriation on the Moon and the other Celestial Bodies, including Mars. It will be a new challenge for all legal actors, especially in the sense of the outer space regime, to explore this concept. This study applies normative legal research methodology. This study found: the current Outer Space Treaty particularly related to the non-appropriation principle is not relevant to the development of space technology and activities. Then, in this study the non-appropriation principle will be revisited based on the customary international law mechanism. Second, this study found the suitable scheme of appropriation during Mars Colonization Plan by establishing an Independent entity which authorize and organize the activities and also by implementing several stages in appropriating the Martian areas. Third, this study then proposed legal framework through amending and modernizing the Outer Space Treaty in order to compromise between the non-appropriation principle and the development of space commercialization. Keywords: Corpus Juris Spatialis; Mars Colonization; Non-Appropriation Rencana Kolonisasi Mars: Kemungkinan Dan Skema Pengambilalihan Di Mars Abstrak Di awal era keantariksaan, kegiatan keantariksaan digerakkan dan dimonopoli oleh negara. Ini diperburuk dengan adanya biaya tinggi, campur tangan militer, dan kemungkinan penggunaan oleh sipil yang tidak pasti. Namun, seiring dengan berkembangnya teknologi ruang angkasa, manfaat besar yang diciptakan oleh aktivitas keantariksaan secara bertahap memotivasi perusahaan swasta untuk menghabiskan lebih banyak modal dan menggunakan ruang tersebut untuk tujuan komersial. Baru-baru ini, dua perusahaan keantariksaan besar swasta, SpaceX dan Mars One, dikabarkan telah merilis misi mereka ke Mars dalam rangka melakukan Rencana Kolonosasi Mars (Mars Colonization Plan). Di sisi lain, Outer Space Treaty dan Corpus Juris Spatialis lainnya secara jelas melarang untuk melakukan perampasan di Bulan dan Benda-benda Langit lainnya, termasuk Mars. Ini akan menjadi tantangan baru bagi semua aktor hukum, terutama dalam arti rezim keantariksaan, untuk mendalami konsep ini. Penelitian ini menggunakan metodologi penelitian hukum normatif. Studi ini menemukan: Traktat Luar Angkasa saat ini khususnya terkait dengan prinsip non-apropriasi tidak relevan dengan perkembangan teknologi dan kegiatan keantariksaan. Kemudian, dalam penelitian ini, prinsip non-apropriasi ditinjau kembali berdasarkan mekanisme hukum kebiasaan internasional. Studi ini juga menemukan, skema apropriasi yang sesuai selama Rencana Kolonisasi Mars adalah dengan membentuk entitas Independen yang menguasai dan mengatur kegiatan dan juga dengan menerapkan beberapa tahap dalam mengambil alih wilayah Mars. Studi ini kemudian mengusulkan kerangka hukum melalui amandemen dan modernisasi Traktat Luar Angkasa untuk mengompromikan antara prinsip non-apropriasi dan pengembangan komersialisasi ruang angkasa. Kata kunci: Corpus Juris Spasialis, Kolonisasi Mars, non-Apropriasi.

Chapter 7. Human colonies and the cosmos.

We have come far from the days when space activities were the monopoly of States. Henceforth, private actors, from the tech world, possess significant financial means which they intend to mobilise in order to exploit the resources of outer space commercially and, eventually, to inhabit outer space. As a result, the principle of non-appropriation of celestial bodies is seen by some as an impediment to the development of the exploitation of space.Is it really possible to envisage a human community inhabiting outer space without claiming exclusive rights on the surface of celestial bodies? Can the resources extracted from celestial bodies be appropriated and if so what legal regime could manage the said resources?This article attempts to answer these questions with a double approach focussing on the ownership of celestial resources and the ownership of celestial bodies.The recognition since the Obama Act that celestial resources can be appropriated imposes a model of management of the said resources in the interests of the whole of mankind.Likewise, without undermining the fundamental principle of non-appropriation, States should establish themselves as the managers and guarantors of the use of celestial bodies in that they constitute the common heritage of Earth’s community.

The Principle of Non-Appropriation and the Exclusive Uses of LEO by Large Satellite Constellations

The Principle of Non-Appropriation and the Exclusive Uses of LEO by Large Satellite Constellations

The Viability of Space Mining in the Current Legal Regime

ABSTRACTSeveral private players have expressed their desire to mine resources in space. This posits ethical and legal concerns. Several scholars argue that space mining activities flout the national non-appropriation principle enshrined in Article II of the Outer Space Treaty. However, it is the opinion of the author that space mining does not per se violate the provisions of Article II, though space mining brings forward other concerns of breach of cooperation and environmental damage. The current legal regime is not adequately equipped to address these problems. The national legislations of several countries which allow for space mining do not address these issues. Even though an international regime emulating deep seabed mining addresses some of these concerns, the current political structure is not in favor of such a development. Hence, the legal viability of any potential space mining industry is on tenuous terms.

Fundamental Principles of Space Resources Exploitation: A Recent Development of International and Municipal Law

Space law is normally referred to international space law. As national space activities develop, however, national space laws have been legislated in many countries for the development of space resources. These are used to present conflicting cases between national and international space law (corpus juris spatialis internationalis) on the interpretation of space resource exploitation. This study is devoted to bridging the gap between these two legal systems. In this paper, the author will critically review the fundamental principles of space resource exploitation under international law and suggest a direction for setting up national space laws for future space resources. This paper is composed of seven parts, including a short Introduction and Conclusion. Part two will discuss acts pertaining to asteroid resources. Part three will deal with res extra commercium. Part four will analyze the non-appropriation principle. Part five will look into the common heritage of mankind. Part six will investigate res nullius humanitatus.

Book Review: Exclusive Use in an Inclusive Environment: The Meaning of the Non-Appropriation Principle for Space Resource Exploitation, by Philip De Man. (Series: Space Regulations Library. vol

Book Review: <i>Exclusive Use in an Inclusive Environment: The Meaning of the Non-Appropriation Principle for Space Resource Exploitation,</i> by Philip De Man. (Series: Space Regulations Library. vol

LEGALITY OF UNILATERAL EXPLOITATION OF SPACE RESOURCES UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

AbstractIn recent years, there has been a surge of private investment in space resources and the enactment of domestic legislation aimed at protecting property rights over the resources to be extracted. This article argues that the unilateral exploitation of space resources is not prohibited by the principle of non-appropriation and is consistent with the freedom of use for common benefit and interests, with the caveat that it does not exclude others from exploitation or exacerbate inequality among States. It also argues that a laissez-faire approach would be detrimental to the orderly, sustainable and safe exploitation and use of space resources and calls for the establishment of an international regulatory regime consisting of rules concerning international coordination, benefits sharing and environmental protection.

Fifty Years of Outer Space Treaty: its retrospect and prospect

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty(OST) celebrates its 50th anniversary in 2017. This article deals with the OST"s retrospect during the fifty years of the Treaty and its prospect in international law. Main subjects of this article focus on the followings: Freedom of Exploration and Scientific Research in Outer Space, Prohibition of National Appropriation, Application of International Law, Peaceful Use of Outer Space, Rescue and Return of Objects in Outer Space and Astronauts, International Responsibility for States’ Activities in Outer Space, Registration of Space Objects and Exclusive Jurisdiction, Respect for the Rights of Other States, Duty of Openness and Transparency in the OST. Because of the rapid development of space science and technology there is a need that there must be a new treaty instead of the OST for solving the current problems raised in the exploration and use of outer space. However, in retrospect of the fifty years of the OST some principles such as the freedom for exploration and scientific research in outer space, the principle of non-appropriation, and the principle of the respect of other countries’ rights in the OST have become customary law and jus cogens in international law. Furthermore the principles of global public interest in outer space in the OST imposes international obligations erga omnes applicable to all States. As customary international law, the OST reflects some rules that bind even those states who are not formal parties to the treaty itself. The present framework of space law incorporates a substantial body of rules in the form of treaties and sets of principles. In order to supplement the shortcomings of the space treaties there have been many soft laws such as recommendations, declarations and resolutions adopted by international organizations and regional communities. The OST represents the most fundamental and all-encompassing of the space treaties, and hence the foundation for all of space law. Thus the OST should be not only an international agreement of high importance as the constitution of outer space establishing rule of law in outer space, but also a manifesto of genuine expectations of all segments of mankind. It is therefore imperative that not only the letter but also the sprit of the OST govern space activities of States. Activities contrary to both the spirit and letter of the OST would shatter the belief in the rule of law and in the international democratic law-making process.

A pragmatic approach to sovereignty on Mars

Rising interest in Mars colonization from both private and public sectors necessitates a renewed discussion about sovereignty in space. The non-appropriation principle of the Outer Space Treaty currently prohibits any sovereign claims to celestial bodies, but it remains unclear how this principle should be applied to the peaceful colonization of Mars. Here we develop a pragmatic approach to guide the settlement of Mars, which is based upon a “bounded first possession” model with mandatory planetary parks. Scientists, experts, and leaders will establish planetary park locations and regulations through worldwide community solicitation in order to protect sites of scientific, aesthetic, historical, cultural, environmental, spiritual value. Colonization parties may occupy limited plots of martian land and may claim exclusive economic rights within this zone, while still refraining from any claims to sovereignty. All colonists remain under the legal jurisdiction of their host nation, with conflicts to be resolved diplomatically or through a temporary tribunal system composed of representatives from other Mars colonies. We also propose the formation of a Mars Secretariat as an administrative body with limited power to facilitate communication among parties. Our model for Mars colonization remains consistent with the Outer Space Treaty, but we also recommend revisiting or amending the non-appropriation and province of mankind principles to resolve the ambiguity of how nations, corporations, and individuals may utilize the resources of space.

Jus Cogens Norms in International Space Law

This paper is dedicated to the research of the concept of jus cogens norms in international space law. The author is proving existence of the peremptory norms in international space law by the global public interest of the international community in outer space, which occurs first of all because of nature of outer space, its physical characteristics and prospects of exploration and use it gives to States. The author is analyzing opinions of some highly qualified publicists in sphere of international law according to the specific jus cogens norms regulating outer space activities. The theoretical basis of this paper includes studying the scientific researches of such authors as A.D. McNair, A. Cassese, A. Orakhelashvili, R. Jakhu. This paper also includes researching legal nature of some of jus cogens norms in international space law, in particularly, the principle of non-appropriation of outer space and the principle of freedom of exploration and use of outer space for the benefit of all States. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n6p421