Space Law Treaties and Principles
The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space is the forum for the development of
international space law. The Committee has concluded five international treaties and five sets of
principles on space-related activities.
These five treaties deal with issues such as the non-appropriation of outer space by any one country,
arms control, the freedom of exploration, liability for damage caused by space objects, the safety
and rescue of spacecraft and astronauts, the prevention of harmful interference with space activities
and the environment, the notification and registration of space activities, scientific investigation and
the exploitation of natural resources in outer space and the settlement of disputes.
Each of the treaties stresses the notion that outer space, the activities carried out in outer space and
whatever benefits might be accrued from outer space should be devoted to enhancing the well-
being of all countries and humankind, with an emphasis on promoting international cooperation
The initiation of space exploration and subsequently its advancement unexpectedly sparked off
another field of law known as the law of outer space or the space law. Space law is an area of law
that helps in governing activities in outer space and the effects arising out of such activities in
relation to mankind. It is very difficult to arrive at a uniform definition of outer space but according
to Federation Aeronautique Internationale, the Karman Line situated at an altitude of 100 km is
regarded as the distinguishing factor between aeronautics and astronautics as far as the boundary is
concerned. The United States limits the same boundary to 80 km and in case of re-entry, it’s 120 km.
The United Kingdom differentiates between airspace and outer space as the highest point at which
an aircraft can fly. Space law is an integral part of international law and is governed by the UN. In
1958, upon the request of U.S. President coupled with Soviet Premier, the UN created a Committee
on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, better known by the name “COPUOS” to look into the legal
intricacies related to activities in the exploration of outer space. United Nations Office for Outer
Space Affairs (UNOOSA), in particular, is dedicated towards defining the scope and extent of space
law, at present. The office is responsible for assisting developing countries in using space technology
for development and for supporting inter-governmental discussions in the Committee as well as its
Subcommittees namely Scientific & Technical Subcommittee and Legal Subcommittee.
The basic structure of space law is dependent upon five UN Treaties and another five sets of
Principles adopted by the UN. Although there are innumerable resolutions to this effect but the
principles and treaties mentioned below provides for the most significant and substantive portion of
space law.
The Five Core United Nations Treaties related to Outer Space
The Outer Space Treaty of 1967
Colloquially known as “The Outer Space Treaty,” the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of
States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies was
negotiated at the height of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. While the
two nations were on the opposite side of the Space Race, both participants had recognized the
extreme danger and catastrophic effects of a potential war in Outer Space.
The Outer Space Treaty borrowed many of its principles from earlier-adopted United Nations
resolutions. For instance, Article IV’s prohibition on the use of nuclear weapons and the promotion
of peaceful activities in Outer Space originated from United Nations General Assembly Resolution
1884. By prohibiting military actions in Outer Space, the Outer Space Treaty had the effect of
promoting security and stability as all sides’ publicly-announced restrictions encouraged “liberty and
freedom by increasing the reliable and known domains where peace is ensured by law.”
Although written fifty years ago, the Outer Space Treaty was visionary for its time and is still
remarkably relevant today. For instance, during the negotiations, the topic of private commercial
activities in Outer Space had been discussed and a compromise was reached. As indicated by its draft
on a UN resolution, the Soviet Union wanted to limit activities in Outer Space to national
governments only (Outer Space is “free for exploration and use by all States”). But, the United States
wanted Outer Space available for free market principles, ensuring that space-related private
enterprises could develop and flourish. Ultimately, a compromise was reached–via Article VI of the
Outer Space Treaty–in which private commercial activities were allowed in Outer Space but must be
authorized by their State party who will also take responsibility and liability for such activities. This
framework has allowed for coordination among private entities and governmental agencies as well as
contributed to the success of private commercial space-related activities today.
The Outer Space Treaty officially opened for signature on January 27, 1967, and entered into force on
October 10, 1967. As of July 2017, 107 countries are parties to The Outer Space Treaty, while another
23 countries have signed but not ratified the treaty. Developed at a time when space-related
activities were still in their infancy, by design, simplicity is at the heart of the Outer Space Treaty.
Because of this characteristic, the Outer Space Treaty is susceptible to multiple interpretations which
limit its practical use. However, as the first major international treaty related to Space, the Outer
Space Treaty has served as the fundamental backbone for every major space-related legislation
passed in the last 50 years.
Principle 7 of Declaration of 1963 and Article 8 of Treaty of 1967 talks about the rules regarding
jurisdiction and control exercised by any State over the space object, which is particularly based on
the place of registry of the space vehicle. Further, the “Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the
Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space, 1968” as well as the
“Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, 1972” bears no
relevance if the space object concerned is not registered. “Convention on Registration of Objects
Launched into Outer Space, 1976” provided a solution by formulating rules and regulations regarding
registration of space objects. It purports that the Secretary-General of the UN is required to register
all the space objects launched into the space.
And for the purpose of registration, the following information should be provided:
1. Name of Launching State(s)
2. Appropriate designator or registration number
3. Location of launch
4. Date of launch
5. Basic orbital parameters
6. And general function of space object
In case of more than one Launching State, it should be the duty of the Launching States to determine
the State of registry through mutual agreement. Every State of registry should keep a track of its
space object and inform the Secretary-General of its various activities in space. When a space object
makes a safe landing, the Secretary-General should be informed of its landing and the end of space
activity. This has to be recorded in the register maintained for the purpose of registration, which is
openly accessible for all.
The Rescue Agreement of 1968
Formally known as the “Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the
Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space”, at a total of ten articles, the Rescue Agreement is the
shortest of these five United Nations treaties related to Space. The Rescue Agreement is intended to
elaborate on the Article V rescue provisions of the Outer Space Treaty.
Under the Rescue Agreement, should any party become aware of a space object and/or spacecraft
crew in distress, that party should notify the Secretary General of the United Nations and the party
that is responsible for the launch of such crew and/or object. Additionally, if such object and/or crew
lands in an area under a party’s control and/or is in an area where a party is able to provide
assistance, then such party should render all assistance that is possible to rescue/retrieve such crew
and/or object and to return them to the country responsible for the launch of such crew and/or
object.
While non-controversial and largely a “routine” agreement, the Rescue Agreement has two
interesting characteristics. One related to the definition for “launching authority” and the other
related to the use of “personnel of a spacecraft.”
First, in Article 6, the Rescue Agreement includes “intergovernmental organization” as a part of the
definition for a “launching authority.” This is different from most other treaties where such
definitions would be limited to a particular State-party rather than an organization that can represent
a group of State-parties. As the first major treaty that enables an “intergovernmental organization”
to have the same level of authority as a national government, the Rescue Agreement might have
been a harbinger for the eventual creation of the European Union.
Second, instead of using the term “astronaut” as expressed in Article V of the Outer Space Treaty, the
term “personnel of a spacecraft” is used in the actual text of the agreement. This difference in
terminology has led some to argue that this is the drafters’ deliberate intent in indicating that the
word “astronaut” should not be synonymous with the phrase “personnel of a spacecraft.” However,
because the formal title to the Rescue Agreement contains the word “astronaut,” drafters might have
written “personnel” so that the Agreement would apply to both astronauts (a largely United States-
centric term) and cosmonauts (a largely Soviet Union-centric term). But, as briefly explored in my
“Are Space Tourists Astronauts?” post, this does beg the question of who is included as a “personnel
of a spacecraft.” Is the term specifically limited to astronauts, cosmonauts, and other professional
flight participants or should it also include space tourists as well?
The Rescue Agreement officially opened for signature on April 22, 1968 and entered into force on
December 3, 1968. As of July 2017, 96 countries are parties to the Rescue Agreement and another 23
countries have signed the agreement.
Space Liability Convention of 1972
The Space Liability Convention, or formally the Convention on International Liability for Damage
Caused by Space Objects, elaborates on the international liability regime introduced in Article VII of
the Outer Space Treaty. This convention sets up two standards of liabilities but also ensures that
claims under the Space Liability Convention are limited to State entities only. If an individual wishes
to make a claim under the Space Liability Convention, that individual will need to petition the
individual’s government to make a claim on his/her behalf.
Under the Space Liability Convention, there are two standards of liabilities: strict liability and fault-
based liability. For any damage caused by a country’s space object on the surface of the Earth or to
an aircraft in flight, that country is strictly, or absolutely, liable for any and all such damage. This
means that such country would even be responsible for any damage caused by circumstances
outside of that country’s control. However, for any damage caused by a country’s space object
anywhere other than on the surface of the Earth or to an aircraft in flight, that country is only liable
for the damage that is due to the fault of such country or such country’s personnel. Under both of
these liability regimes, when more than one country is at fault, all of these countries will be jointly
and severally liable (essentially where a full claim can be made against any country at fault, and it’s
up to these countries themselves to figure out the appropriate apportionment) for the damages that
are covered.
To date, only one official claim has been made under the Space Liability Convention. In January 1978,
a Soviet Union controlled nuclear-powered satellite, Kosmos 954, crashed into Canadian territory
upon reentry after a malfunction. First, the Canadian officials invoked Article 5 of the Rescue
Agreement to inform the Soviet Union that it had discovered and located satellite debris from
Kosmos 954. Because some of these debris fragments were still radioactive, the recovery and clean-
up process proved costly; pursuant to the Space Liability Convention, since the debris caused damage
to the surface of the Earth, the Soviet Union is strictly liable for all costs associated with such
damage. Hence, Canada demanded that the Soviet Union must repay all of the costs associated with
the recovery of, clean-up for, and damages (including future expenses) caused by Kosmos 954 to the
tune of 6,041,174.70 Canadian Dollars. The Soviet Union eventually agreed to pay about 3 million
Canadian Dollars.
The Space Liability Convention officially opened for signatures on March 29, 1972 and entered into
force on September 1, 1972. As of August 2017, 95 countries are parties to the Space Liability
Convention and another 19 countries have signed the instrument. Although only one official claim
has been made under the Space Liability Convention, as briefly discussed in my space debris blog
post, this treaty might have more and more relevancy as the earth’s orbit is being clogged up by
more and more defunct satellites.
Registration Convention of 1975
Like the Rescue Agreement and the Liability Convention, the Registration Convention, or formally
Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, also expands on the Outer Space
Treaty. Specifically, the Registration Convention expands on Article VIII of the Outer Space Treaty and
lays the foundation for a system of registration for objects launched into space.
A fairly straightforward treaty, the Registration Convention plays a critical role in providing teeth to
and ensuring the success of the other United Nation space-related treaties. For instance, without a
system of proper registration, countries will not be able to properly identify and notify the relevant
launch party responsible for the space craft in distress. Additionally, countries will also have a hard
time in successfully demanding damage-related compensation payments under the Space Liability
Convention.
The Registration Convention officially opened for signatures on January 14, 1975 and entered into
force on September 15, 1976. Perhaps due to the potential for liabilities, many non-space-faring
nations have not ratified the convention and the Registration Convention has one of the lowest
ratification rates of these space-related treaties. As of July 2017, 64 countries are parties to the
Registration Convention and another 3 countries have signed the instrument.
Moon Treaty of 1979
Although it is one of the five major United Nation treaties related to Outer Space, the Moon Treaty,
or formally the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial
Bodies, has largely been considered a failed agreement.
The Moon Treaty also elaborates on the concepts and ideals introduced in the Outer Space Treaty.
The Moon Treaty introduces a system of governance for the Moon and other celestial bodies in the
Solar System that is similar to the “Enterprise” system that was introduced in the 1994 Agreement of
the Law of the Sea Convention. Specifically, Article 11 of the Moon Treaty states that “the Moon and
its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind . . . [and] is not subject to national
appropriation by any claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”
Like the application of the “Enterprise” system to oceanic resources, the natural resources of the
Moon is, according to the Moon Treaty, entitled to “equitable sharing by all State Parties in the
benefits derived from those resources.” Hence, it does not matter which country “dug up” these
resources, that country will not have complete and exclusive ownership and control over such
resources. Additionally, through Article 11, the Moon Treaty forbids any individuals and non-
governmental or non-intergovernmental private entities from owning any “surface or the subsurface
of the moon or any areas thereof.” This treaty’s position on private ownership has had important
ramification on two key areas of space law today: 1) Space Mining (whether private enterprises can
own the resources they mine as explored in this earlier blog post) and 2) Property Rights on Mars
(whether private companies can stake ownership rights on other planets in the solar system, which
had been explored in this earlier blog post).
The Moon Treaty was officially opened for signatures on December 18, 1979 and entered into force
on July 11, 1984. But, because the majority of space-faring nations (including the United States,
Russia, China, Japan, and several members of the European Space Agency) have not ratified, signed,
or acceded to the Moon Treaty, the agreement does not have widespread practical effects. As of July
2017, only 17 countries are parties to the Moon Treaty and another 4 countries have signed the
instrument.
Indian Space Laws
India still does not have a space law to govern its activities in the outer space. The government has
its monopoly in India's pace sector, which is led by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
The private sector has requested the government a number of times to open up the Indian Space
Programme so that businesses can invest to build India's space capabilities. However, no major
changes have been brought and the space program is still under the monopoly of the government.
The Space Activities Bill 2017 was introduced by the Indian Government to make a change in terms
of the space policies of India. The draft bill has completed public and legal consultation and it has
now been sent for further approvals.
The space activities in India are entirely governed by the Department of Space since its
establishment in 1972 and before that the Department of Atomic Energy was taking care of all the
administrative activities of the space programme of India. The need for national space laws or
policies was never felt in India until recently as outer space is not seen as a domestic issue but as an
international issue.
India never considered having a space law due to the following two reasons: Firstly, earlier India did
not have a private sector which could invest in the outer space plans of India. It is only after the
private sector recognized the potential in investing in India's space programme that willingness to
invest in India's space programme was shown.
Secondly, the Indian Space Programme did not plan to explore the space or even send manned or
unmanned mission to the outer space however, this has now changed as India has sent missions to
Mars and moon. India was of the opinion that India was already a party to many international space
laws and there was no need for separate domestic space laws.
At present, the things have changed significantly. In May 2020, the government proposed to privatize
the Indian Space Programme however, this assertion was denied by the chairman of the Indian Space
Programme many times.
In June 2020, the government introduced a new organization known as the IN-SPACe (Indian National
Space Promotion and Authorisation Centre). IN-SPACe is a "single window nodal agency" established
to boost the commercialization of Indian space activities."2. It was due to the formation of this
organization that the debate around the privatization of the Indian space programme had begun.
This Indian government had also come up with a draft of the Space-based Communication Policy of
India-2020 namely the Spacecom Policy- 2020 and the draft norms, rules and regulations and the
guidelines and procedures for the implementation of the Spacecom Policy-2020.
The policy aims to do the following two things. Firstly, the policy aims at regulating the commercial
use of satellites, orbital slots, and ground stations for communication needs. Secondly, this policy
also discusses how private players can get authorization to institute new communication satellites
and ground stations.
conclusion
It can be concluded that the elementary portion of space law is basically structured upon the very
firm objectives of United Nations. The sole aim of United Nations in relation to space law is to
promote international cooperation, understanding and security in the exploration of outer space.
Every State bears international responsibility towards its space activities and if damage is caused due
to negligence, the claimant State can invoke absolute liability on the part of the other State. Special
consideration should be given to developing States without any discrimination on the basis of
principles of equality and natural justice, because of the special status they hold. Mutual assistance
to States in distress should be provided by other State Parties to the treaty who are in a position to
do so. Every treaty or principle should be in conformity with the UN Charter and principles of
International law. The above mentioned principles are incorporated in every draft in one way or the
other upholding the very firm stand of the United Nations.
India still does not have enough and appropriate space laws as this is a newer issue in comparison to
the issues and topics on which various laws already exist. India is forming new space laws and even
proposing new laws regarding outer space. There is definitely a need for laws on outer space as in
the present times disputed arise on every single issue so there is a need for space laws to govern the
activities in the outer space. Many other countries have their own space laws and India cannot rely
on international treaties only so more and better space laws are the need of the hour.
