http://www.dllegal.com/page18/page18.htmlSpace LawSpace law is an area of the law that encompasses national and international law governing activities in outer space and began with the launch of the world's first artificial satellite by the Soviet Union in October 1957, named Sputnik. Since that time, space law has evolved and assumed more importance as humankind has increasingly come to use and rely on space-based resources and realised the possibility of near-planet mineral extraction.
Although there is no caselaw on the definition of the term "outer space", most lawyers agree that outer space generally begins at the lowest altitude above sea level at which objects can orbit the Earth, approximately 100 km (62 mi).
Beginning in 1957, nations began discussing systems to ensure the peaceful use of outer space, commencing with bilateral discussions between the United States and USSR in 1958 which resulted in the presentation of issues to the UN for debate and led to the 1959 UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS).
The COPUOS Legal Subcommittee has been a primary forum for discussion and negotiation of international agreements relating to outer space ever since.
Five international treaties have been negotiated and drafted in the COPUOS:
* The 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere in Outer Space and Under Water
(“Outer Space Nuclear Ban Treaty”)
* The 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies
(the "Outer Space Treaty").
* The 1968 Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space
(the "Rescue Agreement").
* The 1972 Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects
(the "Liability Convention").
* The 1975 Convention on Registration of Objects Launched Into Outer Space
(the "Registration Convention").
* The 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies
(the "Moon Treaty").
* The 1998 Agreement Governing co-operation on the Civil International Space Station
(the "Space Station Agreement")
The Outer Space Treaty is the most widely-adopted treaty, with 98 parties. It requires parties to authorize and supervise national space activities, including the activities of non-governmental entities such as commercial and non-profit organizations and as a result many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states).
The Rescue Agreement, the Liability Convention and the Registration Convention all elaborate on provisions of the Outer Space Treaty.
It was intended that the Moon Treaty serve as a new comprehensive treaty which would supersede or supplement the Outer Space Treaty, most notably elaborating upon the Outer Space Treaty's provisions regarding resource appropriation and prohibition of territorial sovereignty, but the Moon Treaty has only 12 parties, and many consider it to be a failed treaty due to its limited acceptance. The failure to have the Moon Treaty ratified by a wider audience is almost certainly due to the uncertainties about what mineral rights etc may arise on the Moon. Many nations believe that an agreement about lack of territorial nature may limit future exploitation rights.
Under the Space Station Agreement signed between Canada, Member States of the European Space Agency, Japan, Russian Federation, and USA, it has been established that a single entity (in this case NASA) may be the lead agency in coordinating the member states' contributions to and activities, although each nation has jurisdiction over its own modules. .
Is the system breaking down?COPUOS operates on the basis of consensus, i.e. all committee and subcommittee delegates must agree on treaty language before it can be included in the final version of a treaty, and the committees cannot place new items on their agendas unless all member nations agree. One reason that the U.N. space treaties lack definitions and are unclear in other respects, is because it is easier to achieve consensus when language and terms are vague, but this is achieved at the expense of certainty.
In recent years, the COPUOS Legal Subcommittee has been unable to achieve consensus on discussion of a new comprehensive space agreement, and it is also unlikely that the Subcommittee will be able to agree to amend the Outer Space Treaty in the foreseeable future; however the Space Station Agreement is considered to be a model for future agreements regarding international cooperation in the first off-world colonies and scientific/industrial bases such as facilities on the Moon and Mars, although the national jurisdiction over own modules and provisions on criminal jurisdiction under the space station agreement are clearly inappropriate and it is believed that member states’ agreement will need to encompass a fully federated jurisdictional code.
In other words, the answer is Yes. Many space faring nations seem to believe that discussing a new space agreement or amendment of the Outer Space Treaty would be futile and time consuming, because entrenched differences regarding resource appropriation, property rights and other issues relating to commercial activity make consensus unlikely. The developing space nations are concerned that the existing space-faring nations will monopolize and dominate space resources. As commercial Space activity moves beyond the scope of the government activity, and as the satellite communications industry enlarges and becomes intertwined with the development of many commercial spaceports, the question for the legal profession is how to regulate private space activities in such a manner that regulation does not hinder or preclude investment, while still ensuring that commercial activities remain compatible with international law.
Geostationary orbit allocationSatellites in geostationary orbit must all occupy a single ring above the equator, approximately 35,800 km into space. There are increasing arguments about this space as modern satellites being inserted into geostationary orbit are significantly more advanced than the satellites already occupying the space due to the very significant annual advances in technology. The requirement to space these satellites apart that is mandated by old satellites that are functionally active but whose orbital management technology is considered obsolete means that there are a limited number of orbital "slots" available. It is likely that, over the next decade, conflict between different countries wishing access to the same orbital slots (i.e. same longitude but differing latitudes)and the advent of killer-sat technologies will lead to material conflict. At present, these disputes are addressed through the ITU allocation mechanism; however as equator countries located at the Earth's equator take forceable assertion of their legal claim to control the use of space above their territory and as emerging space-technology countries determine that spy satellites infringe on their territorial space and are legitimate targets for killer-satellites, it is likely that uni-laterial enforcement knock-down in breach of the existing space treaties will occur. It is unclear how countries will deal with
commercial satellites infringing on their territorial outer space.
Use of GeoSpatial DataIn the past, legal issues associated with spatial data and technology were primarily a concern for lawyers that worked with or for the government. Now, both public sector and private sector users and providers of geospatial data and technologies face a wide range of legal issues associated with growth in consumer and business applications for spatial technology. Such applications include Earth browsers, satellite navigation devices in cars and PDA’s, location-based services associated with cell phones, business intelligence, social networking and satellite tracking of vehicles and equipment. All of these applications raise issues that involve intellectual property rights, liability, privacy, and national security. In many cases, the existing legal and policy framework is inadequate to provide governments, businesses and consumers clear guidance on these issues.
Near-Earth DebrisThe U.S. Air Force, owner of the world’s most sophisticated network of ground-based radars tracking space traffic, has agreed to provide wider access to its high-accuracy catalog showing the whereabouts of orbital debris and operational satellites as part of an effort to enable commercial and non-U.S. government satellite operators to better avoid in-orbit collisions, according to U.S. Air Force officials. The choice was to open up the data or let growing efforts in Europe, Russia and elsewhere to coordinate existing radar and optical telescope assets into a coordinated space awareness network develop without active American involvement.
The US recgnises that a failure to stem orbital collisions of the kind that destroyed an operational Iridium mobile communications satellite Feb. 10 2009 ultimately could render certain orbits of high strategic and public service value unusable for decades and the military has to balance strategically sensitive information with the risk of a long-term deficit of information if an alternative system develops. Although publishing the information on the web at
www.space-track.org, it is available only in a form that satellite operators have long said is not useful for space traffic management. This data, called Two-Line Elements (TLEs), has too great a margin of error to be effective.
Some satellite operators, particularly those with satellites in geostationary orbit, complement the U.S. Air Force TLE data with information from other sources.
The Russian-led International Scientific Optical Network, based at Moscow’s Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics, includes some 25 optical telescopes, mainly in the former Soviet Union, that can be deployed on a case-by-case basis as part of commercial transactions. But this network’s focus is on objects in geostationary orbit, the operating orbit for most commercial satellites but far above low Earth orbit regions where debris exists. In contrast Europe, French radar and German optical systems have been used to verify close satellite encounters in low Earth orbit once TLE data has spotted a potential problem, but the European assets have nowhere near the reach of the US systems.
The US fear a Euro-Russian alliance that could rival the U.S. Space Surveillance Network.The Satellite Orbital Conjunction Reports Assessing Threatening Encounters in Space, or SOCRATES, service is likewise based on U.S. Air Force TLEs but was unable to warn of a pending collision in low Earth orbit on Feb. 10 when the Iridium collided with Russia’s Cosmos satellite at about 790 kilometers. One U.S. Air Force official said a full review of how space traffic management is conducted is being readied for completion before this summer. It is unknown whether non-U.S. government operators with satellites in low Earth orbit will be given access to the high-accuracy catalog of orbiting objects, or be permitted to ask the Air Force for daily updates based on the high-accuracy catalog.
Bethesda, Md.-based Iridium Satellite LLC has been given special access to otherwise nonpublic Air Force Space Surveillance Network information, but only for limited periods, according to John Campbell, Iridium’s vice president for government affairs.
In a March 2 interview, Campbell said Iridium was given access to the high-accuracy data starting in January 2007, following a China anti-satellite missile firing that destroyed a retired Chinese weather satellite operating in an orbit near Iridium’s, spewing thousands of pieces of debris that will make Iridium more vulnerable to collision; however it now transpires that access to the high-accuracy data was only for the debris from the Chinese anti-satellite test. The access ended in January 2008, but has been renewed since the Feb. 10 collision to aid Iridium in repositioning an in-orbit spare satellite to replace the one that was destroyed. Iridium operates a constellation of 66 satellites.
The future of space lawWhile this field of the law is still in its infancy, it is in an era of rapid change and development, comparible with the development of internet law in the 1990s. If commercial space transportation becomes widely available, with substantially lower launch costs, then all countries will be able to directly reap the benefits of space resources and only then will consensus be achieved.