ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Stagnation in the development of the process of regulation of relations in outer space and on celestial bodies as well as a large number of gaps and contradictions in this area along with impressive technical progress in the field of space activities and the expansion of its subject composition have led to the need to reconsider existing approaches to regulating such relations. This article is the beginning of an extensive study of the process and results of the regulation of space activities from 1958 to the present day. The purpose of this study is a deep analysis of international documents adopted for the entire period of space activities, as well as an attempt to highlight the basic principles, concepts, models, and rules of space activities. The esults of this study will make it possible to understand the issues that remain unresolved and the gaps in the field of space law and also set new tasks for the development of space law and suggest ways to solve them. This article includes a review and analysis of international documents adopted at the first stage of the development of space activities (1958–1963), and also the goals and conditions for their adoption. As a result of this analysis, the article presents a list and description of the tasks that were formed by the international community at this stage along with the difficulties that arose at the stage of their formation and implementation. In addition, a new vision of the concepts that arose at this stage in connection with the need to regulate space activities is proposed. In the future, the results of this analysis will allow us to continue the study of space relationships to determine and describe the essence of the legal systems that regulate or may regulate space activities, as well as to identify (define, classify, and formulate) spatial-territorial jurisdictions and subject-object composition of participants in space activities.
582 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
Marinich V.K., Myklush M.I., Yara O.S.
Regulation of space activities during 1958-
1963.
Stagnation in the development of the process
of regulation of relations in outer space and on
celestial bodies as well as a large number of gaps
and contradictions in this area along with impressive
technical progress in the eld of space activities and
the expansion of its subject composition have led
to the need to reconsider existing approaches to
regulating such relations.
This article is the beginning of an extensive study
of the process and results of the regulation of space
activities from 1958 to the present day.
The purpose of this study is a deep analysis
of international documents adopted for the entire
period of space activities, as well as an attempt to
highlight the basic principles, concepts, models, and
rules of space activities.
The results of this study will make it possible to
understand the issues that remain unresolved and
the gaps in the eld of space law and also set new
tasks for the development of space law and suggest
ways to solve them.
This article includes a review and analysis of
international documents adopted at the rst stage
of the development of space activities (1958–1963),
and also the goals and conditions for their adoption.
As a result of this analysis, the article presents a list
and description of the tasks that were formed by the
international community at this stage along with the
diculties that arose at the stage of their formation
and implementation. In addition, a new vision of the
concepts that arose at this stage in connection with
the need to regulate space activities is proposed.
In the future, the results of this analysis will
allow us to continue the study of space relationships
to determine and describe the essence of the
legal systems that regulate or may regulate space
activities, as well as to identify (dene, classify,
and formulate) spatial-territorial jurisdictions and
subject-object composition of participants in space
activities.
Key words: space law, space activity, jurisdiction,
subjects, objects, outer space.
Марініч В.К., Миклуш М.І., Яра О.С. Регулю-
вання космічної діяльності в 1958-1963 рр.
Стагнація у розвитку процесу регулювання від-
носин у космічному просторі та на небесних тілах,
а також велика кількість прогалин та протиріч у
цій галузі, поряд із значним технічним прогресом
у галузі космічної діяльності та розширенням її
суб’єктного складу, призвели до необхідності за-
ново переглянути існуючі підходи до регулюван-
ня таких відносин.
Ця стаття є початком великого дослідження
процесу та результатів регулювання космічної ді-
яльності за період, починаючи з 1958 року і до
сьогодні.
Метою даного дослідження є глибокий аналіз
міжнародних документів, прийнятих за весь пе-
ріод провадження космічної діяльності, а також
спроба виділити основні принципи, концепції, мо-
делі та правила космічної діяльності.
Результати даного дослідження дозволять зро-
зуміти те, які питання залишилися неврегульова-
ними та які існують прогалини в галузі космічного
права, а також поставити нові завдання щодо роз-
витку космічного права та запропонувати шляхи
їх вирішення.
Безпосередньо у цій статті викладається ог-
ляд та аналіз міжнародних документів, прийнятих
на першому етапі розвитку космічної діяльності
(1958–1963 роки), а також цілі та умови їх при-
йняття. Як результат цього аналізу, у статті ви-
кладено перелік та опис завдань, які були сфор-
мовані міжнародним співтовариством на даному
УДК 341.1/8
DOI https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2023.04.91
REGULATION OF SPACE ACTIVITIES: 1958-1963
Marinich V.K.,
Ph.D. candidate in Law (the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine)
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3206-1436
Myklush M.I.,
CEO, Law Firm “FOX” of Maryna Myklush”
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-2202-9482
Yara O.S.,
Doctor of Law, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Law,
Professor of the Department of Administrative and Financial Law,
National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7245-9158
583
етапі, а також труднощі, що виникли на етапі їх-
нього формування та реалізації. Крім цього, про-
понується нове бачення концепцій, що виникли
на цьому етапі у зв’язку з необхідністю регулю-
вання космічної діяльності.
В подальшому, результати даного аналізу доз-
волять продовжити дослідження космічних вза-
ємовідносин, з метою визначення та опису суті
правових систем, які регулюють або можуть ре-
гулювати космічну діяльність, а також, з метою
виділення (визначення, класифікації та формулю-
вання) просторово-територіальних юрисдикцій та
суб’єктно-об’єктного складу учасників космічної
діяльності.
Ключові слова: космічне право, космічна ді-
яльність, юрисдикція, суб’єкти, об’єкти, косміч-
ний простір.
1. Introduction.
1.1. Problem Statement. The regulation of
relations in outer space and on celestial bodies is
one of the most important tasks of space activity
since the space future of all mankind depends on
this process.
Although the international community made the
rst ocial attempts in this direction back in 1958,
this process remains incomplete. A lot of debate on
this topic has given rise to many theories about the
further development of space relationships. To date,
mankind has not come close to a single position.
Moreover, high-tech states continue the long-begun
space race, which has every chance of leading to a
global space confrontation in the future.
And if the process of regulating space activities
does not move to a new, qualitatively higher level,
then such a confrontation threatens all mankind
with an orbital satellite war, which can develop into
a large-scale space war. At the same time, such a
war could lead to the destruction of all mankind.
This is understandable to most people, regardless of
the academic degree.
In this respect, it is impossible to overestimate
the relevance of any new research in the eld of
regulation of space activities.
At the same time, even a supercial glance is
enough to understand that today the process of
regulating relations in outer space and on celestial
bodies resembles frozen volcanic lava. This lava
previously owed in dierent directions, bypassing
uncomfortable areas, and is now frozen in dierent
places, resembling a “patchwork” and “leaky”
blanket with a lot of patches.
The reason for this is, rst of all, that the process
of regulation of space activities is still a young
process that has not enjoined a solid skeleton for
its development. Unlike modern types of law, such
as civil and commercial law, which have developed
over thousands of years based on ancient Roman
law and extensive human experience, the regulation
of space relationships took place manually and
most often ex post facto (after certain events took
place in space). At the same time, the adopted
international documents were most often based not
on specic experience, but only on the assumptions
of representatives of various states.
In this regard, in the process of development of
space activity, all new and new theories were created
and more and more new documents on its regulation
were adopted, which often contradicted each other
and overlapped each other. The reason for this was
also that at the initial stage, no one understood
what and how to regulate. No one knew either the
alleged subject composition of participants in space
activities, their jurisdictions, or the circumstances
that need to be regulated. In this connection, there
were many scientic and diplomatic disputes even
on the topic of whether all adopted international
documents on space activities can be considered
Space Law or only a part of such documents apply
to this law. At the same time, when adopting
new documents in this area, the participants in
international relations did not correct previous
mistakes and did not make explanations on this
topic, but simply created new additional provisions
that had to be guided by, taking into account the
existing provisions. In the end, this led to a large
number of contradictions, misunderstandings, and
violations of the rules of space activities.
To understand the current situation and gure
out how to move on, it is necessary to conduct
a deep analysis of the entire process of legal
regulation of space activities, step by step, from the
very beginning of its appearance, from 1958 to the
present day.
1.2. The status of the issue. At the same
time, it should be noted that today many scientists,
diplomats, and honored lawyers have studied
the evolution of the process of regulating space
activities.
For example, Marcia S. Smith perfectly described
the history of the process of regulation of space
activities during the rst 25 years of its development
in the book “The rst quarter-century of Spaceight”.
At the same time, Ogunbanwo O. Ogunsola in the
book “International law and outer space activities”
outlined the events and discussions that took place
in the international diplomatic community during
the emergence of the process of regulating space
activities. In turn, Dr. Asamoah O. Y. analyzed and
described the history of the emergence of two major
international documents adopted at the initial stage
of the development of space activities, which he calls
“two declarations of legal principles”[2, p. 129].
Also, in many works, considerable attention
was paid to both international cooperations in the
development of space activities and the military
confrontation of states in space. Thus, on this
occasion, Kenneth S. Pedersen described in his
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
584 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
article “The changing face of international space
cooperation” the position of the United States
regarding international cooperation, which was
formed at the very initial stage of the development
of space activities. At the same time, Everett C.
Dolman outlined in his book Astropolitik: classical
geopolitics in the Space Age” the main reasons for
the militarization of space by states, and primarily
by the United States, despite the constant desire
of other states for peaceful space exploration.
Also, Albert K. Lai analyzed and described in his
book “The Cold War, the Space Race, and the Law
of Outer Space” the situation with the military
confrontation among space states and the reasons
that led to this. In turn, Jonathan F. Galloway in
his article “Game theory and the law and policy of
outer space” modeled the causes and principles of
confrontation of top states, which did not allow and
may never allow states to come to real international
cooperation in space.
However, despite the global confrontation of
super-states in space, many scientists continue
to try to solve the problems of international
cooperation. Thus, in the article “The Role of
bilateral and multilateral agreements in international
space cooperation” Zhao Yun describes the current
problems of international cooperation in space
activities that arose at the initial stage of space
activities and continue to exist to this day as well
as possible options and prospects for their solution.
Jack M. Beard, in his book “Soft law’s failure on the
horizon: the international code of conduct for outer
space activities”, also described the main problems
that have arisen and continue to appear in the
process of the formation of Space Law.
In addition to the above works that were used
in this study, there are also many other scientic
discussions and works related to the development of
the process of regulation of space activities.
However, it should be noted that most of them
include deep analysis only of global international
documents on the regulation of space activities,
such as international treaties or UN conventions.
At the same time, other international documents,
such as Resolutions and Declarations adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly (the UN GA or
the UN General Assembly) were subjected to only
supercial analysis concerning their insignicance.
In turn, it was precisely this position that led to the
emergence of a “patchwork” and “leaky” quilt, which
today consists of the so-called Space Law, where
most of the processes have remained unsettled or
are irresponsibly violated.
In addition, it is necessary to pay attention to
the fact that, in general, scientists considered the
process of regulation of space law only from the
point of view of states or international organizations,
bypassing the point of view of such participants in
space activities as people, non-governmental, and
commercial organizations. This has led to the fact
that such studies have become one-sided and have
missed other important elements of the process of
regulation of space activities.
In this regard, it is necessary to conduct a new
study of this process, based on a deep analysis of all
international documents adopted in this area, and
taking into account all possible points of view.
This article is only the rst part of the study.
1.3. The article is aimed at presenting the
results of the analysis of the following international
documents adopted during the period from 1958 to
1963:
the UN General Assembly Resolution No.
1148 (XII) “Regulation, limitation and balanced
reduction of all armed forces and all armaments;
conclusion of an international convention (treaty)
on the reduction of armaments and the prohibition
of atomic, hydrogen and other weapons of mass
destruction”, adopted by the UN GA during its 12th
session at the 716th plenary meeting, 14 Nov. 1957
(the UN GA Resolution 1148)[7];
the UN General Assembly Resolution No. 1348
(XIII) “Question of the peacefull use of outer space”,
adopted by the UN GA during its 13th session at the
792nd plenary meeting, 13 Dec. 1958 (the UN GA
Resolution 1348)[8];
the UN General Assembly Resolution No. 1472
(XIV) “International co-operation in the peaceful
uses of outer space”, adopted by the UN GA during
its 14th session at the 856th plenary meeting, 12
Dec. 1959 (the UN GA Resolution 1472)[9];
the UN General Assembly Resolution No. 1721
(XVI) “International co-operation in the peaceful
uses of outer space”, adopted by the UN GA during
its 16th session, 20 Dec. 1961 (the UN GA Resolution
1721)[13];
the UN General Assembly Resolution No. 1802
(XVII) “International co-operation in the peaceful
uses of outer space”, adopted by the UN GA during
its 17th session at the 1192nd plenary meeting, 14
Dec. 1962 (the UN GA Resolution 1802)[14];
Treaty banning nuclear weapon tests in the
Atmosphere, in outer space and under water (No.
6964), signed at Moscow (Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics, United States of America and United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), on
5 August 1963 (the Treaty № 6964)[20];
the UN General Assembly Resolution No.
1884 (XVIII) “Question of general and complete
disarmament”, adopted by the UN GA during its
18th session at the 1244th plenary meeting, 17 Oct.
1963 (the UN GA Resolution 1884)[10];
the Declaration of Legal Principles Governing
the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of
Outer Space, adopted by the UN GA during its 18th
session at the 1280th plenary meeting, 13 Dec.
1963, No. 1962 (XVIII) (the Declaration of Legal
Principles)[11];
585
the UN General Assembly Resolution No. 1963
(XVIII) “International Co-operation in the peaceful
uses of outer space”, adopted by the UN GA during
its 18th session at the 1280th plenary meeting, 13
Dec. 1963 (the UN GA Resolution 1963)[12].
While analyzing the above documents, as well
as using dialectical, logical, and systemic research
methods, it is possible to determine the tasks that
were formed by the international community at this
stage in the eld of regulation of space activities, and
the concepts of relationships that began to appear
against the backdrop of the space confrontation that
existed at that time.
Moreover, this analysis will pave the way for
further research to identify (dene, classify, and
formulate) the basic principles, models, and rules
of space activities, spatial-territorial jurisdictions as
well as the subject-object composition of participants
in space activities.
In addition, the results of this study make it
possible to understand the issues that remained
unresolved in the eld of space activities at
this stage, and also acknowledge new tasks the
international community had to solve and identify
possible solutions.
2. The basic material. The main aspects
of the process of regulating space activities
during the 1958-1963 period.
2.1. The UN GA Resolution 1148. The rst step
in regulating space activities can be the adoption
of the UN GA Resolution 1148, in which the United
Nations General Assembly invited States to make
eorts to ensure “that the sending of objects through
outer space shall be exclusively for peaceful and
scientic purposes” (item “f” of paragraph 1)[7].
This ocial international document for the rst
time highlighted information directly related to
actual space activities.
In this case, it is signicant that the rst space-
related initiative of the General Assembly proposed
that States limit their activities in this area to
peaceful and scientic purposes.
2.2. The UN GA Resolution 1348. The next
step in the regulation of space activities was the
adoption of one of the most important resolutions
of that period, namely, the UN GA Resolution 1348.
It should be noted that even though space activity
was a fairly new type of activity at that time, the
provisions of this resolution contain many important
proposals made by the UN General Assembly already
at this initial stage of its development.
For example, the UN General Assembly suggested
all States according to which “outer space should be
used for peaceful purposes only (preamble, items
“a” and “b” of paragraph 1 and paragraph 2)[8].
The absence of a mention of “celestial bodies” in
this sentence means that the UN allowed states to
conduct military operations on “celestial bodies” at
this stage or did not assume the rapid technological
progress of mankind and its ability to get to “celestial
bodies” shortly (for example, such as Moon, Mars,
asteroids, etc.). This is because in those days the
very idea that someone could land on another planet
sounded like science ction[19, p. 39].
However, despite such an omission, all the same,
one may say that at that point the UN General
Assembly laid the foundation for the formulation
and lobbying of the idea of peaceful exploration and
use of the Universe.
In addition to this initiative, Resolution 1348
oered other ideas to States. For example, it was
proposed to implement the exploitation of outer
space for the benet of mankind” (preamble)[8]. In
fact, in this way, the UN General Assembly began to
develop a new idea - the idea of a useful Universe,
with a special emphasis on the benet of humanity.
According to this idea, all subjects engaged in space
activities should have initially acted only in the
interests and for the benet of humanity, and all
other reasons and principles should be secondary
and applied only to this idea.
Also, this resolution marked the beginning of the
process of organizing cooperation in space activities.
Thus, in the preamble of the Resolution, the
UN General Assembly pointed out the great
importance of international co-operation in the
study and utilization of outer space for peaceful
purposes” and “that such co-operation will promote
mutual understanding and the strengthening of
friendly relations among people”, and therefore the
development of programmes of international and
scientic co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer
space should be vigorously pursued”[8].
However, the most interesting and important
proposal that the UN General Assembly made as
part of this process was the proposal to avoid
the extension of present national rivalries into this
new eld” (preamble)[8]. Although this proposal
for the non-competition of states is a dicult idea
to implement, its accomplishment would allow
international cooperation to reach a new global level.
Further to support this idea the UN General
Assembly decided to establish “an ad hoc Committee
on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space” (paragraph
1)[8]. In fact, with this decision, the UN began
the process of forming international bodies and
organizations for the regulation of space activities.
To perform cooperation in space activities the UN
General Assembly has set several important tasks
for the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space (UN COPUOS), namely, the continuation
permanently of the outer space research” (subitem
“i” of item “b” of paragraph 1)[8], organization of the
mutual exchange and dissemination of information
on outer space research” (subitem “ii” of item “b” of
paragraph 1)[8], co-ordination of national research
programmes for the study of outer space” (subitem
“iii” of item “b” of paragraph 1)[8].
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
586 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
Also, the UN General Assembly pointed out the
need to establish the nature of legal problems”
(item “d” of paragraph 1)[8] and, thus, actually set
another task for the creation and development of
space law.
It could therefore be said that at the initial
stage of the implementation of space activities,
the UN General Assembly managed to declare
two main initiatives (on a peaceful Universe and a
useful Universe) as well as formulate and push the
implementation of the idea of cooperation in space
activities.
However, the most important aspect of this
resolution was that the international community,
represented by the UN General Assembly, by
announcing the basic principles and objectives
of space activities, actually determined the legal
status of outer space” as a separate object of
space activities and international cooperation and as
a separate all-encompassing spatial and territorial
unit that does not fall under the jurisdiction of any
state on Earth.
In addition, taking into account the reference
of the text of this resolution to the provisions of
paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the UN Charter[3], it can
be considered that the UN General Assembly has
established the status of a subject of space activities
for all Member States of the United Nations and
directly for the UN, represented by its new body “The
Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space”.
Thus, it can be considered that this resolution
also determined the initial subject composition of
participants in space activities.
At the same time, at this stage, the UN General
Assembly did not consider people and extraterrestrial
intelligent beings, private companies, and non-
governmental organizations as subjects of space
activities.
2.3. The UN GA Resolution 1472. A year later, on
December 12, 1959, the General Assembly adopted a
new resolution - the UN GA Resolution 1472.
An important element of this resolution was the
establishment of specic tasks for the “Committee
on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space” to coordinate
space activities. Thus, the UN continued the
formation and implementation of the idea of
cooperation in space activities.
However, this Resolution became famous not for
its tasks, but for the fact that during its discussion
within the Legal Subcommittee, the representatives
of the United Kingdom and the United States strongly
opposed the position of the exploitation of outer
space only for the benet of mankind”[19, p. 41].
The desire of space states to strengthen their
hegemony in the world was expressed in the
formation of a new goal for their space activities -
for the benet of States.
As a result, the rst controversial provision on
the regulation of space activities appeared in ocial
documents, according to which the exploration and
use of outer space should be only for the betterment
of mankind and to the benet of States” (preamble)
[9].
The conicting nature of this provision was
obvious even at this stage since it was clear to
everyone that most of the goals and actions that are
usually carried out for the benet of certain States
very rarely coincide with the good of all mankind.
Nevertheless, with these provisions, the UN
General Assembly changed and expanded the
original image of the useful Universe, according to
the early formulation of which all subjects engaged
in space activities should have acted only in the
interests and for the benet of humanity.
Thus, the foundation was laid for future lobbying
for the benet of States in matters of space activities.
At the same time, this detail appeared in the context
of a general proposal on the use of outer space only
for the benet of mankind and therefore initially did
not confuse a wide range of legal experts.
2.4. The UN GA Resolution 1721. Provided
in terms of scientic achievements the year 1961
was marked by the rst successful human ight
into space (April 12, 1961), then from the point of
view of regulating space activities its achievements
were associated with the appearance of the UN GA
Resolution 1721 (December 20, 1961).
With this resolution, the UN General Assembly
signicantly accelerated the formation of
international bodies and organizations on the
regulation of space activities to implement the idea
of cooperation.
First of all, the list of the UN authorized bodies and
organizations participating in space activities was
expanded by including “The World Meteorological
Organization”, “The International Telecommunication
Union”, “The Economic Council”, “The Social Council”,
“The Special Fund”, “The Expanded Program of
Technical Assistance” (paragraph 2 of the article
“C”)[13].
In addition, within the framework of the
cooperation initiative, the UN General Assembly
proposed to participate in space activities of non-
governmental organizations” (paragraph 5 of the
article “D”)[13] and, thus, dened them as separate
subjects of space activities. Moreover, it was
proposed to participate in the space activities of a
specic non-governmental organization, namely,
“The International Council of Scientic Unions”
(transformed rst in 1998 into “The International
Council for Science”, and subsequently, after the
merger in 2018 with “The International Social
Science Council” into “The International Science
Council”).
Also, this resolution designated new objects of
space activity, which taking into account previous
similar objects could already be at least conditionally
divided according to the principles of origin and
587
condition into the following types: natural objects,
man-made objects, technical phenomena, and
natural phenomena.
The man-made objects of space activity
mentioned in the resolution include “satellite”
(preamble of article “D”)[13] and “objects launched
into outer space” (paragraph 1 of the article “B”)
[13].
In turn, “satellite communication” (preamble
of article “D”)[13] can be attributed to technical
phenomena.
Natural objects of space activity include “Outer
space”, which has been repeatedly described in
previous resolutions as well as a new spatial-
territorial unit, the “Celestial body” (items “a” and
“b” of paragraph 1 of article “A”)[13].
In addition, pointing to the need for space
research related to the study of weather and climate
on Earth, the UN General Assembly identied
“natural phenomena” (changes occurring in the
nature of the planet Earth as well as any phenomena
in the Universe outside the Earth) as another object
of space activity (item “a” of paragraph 1 of the
article “C”)[13].
At the same time, the UN General Assembly
proposed one of the basic rules of space activity –
the rule for registering “objects launched into outer
space” in the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of
Outer Space (paragraphs 1 and 2 of the article “B”)
[13]. This provision established the basis of the
international order of space activities and xed the
legal link between the “object” and the launching
States, and also established the moral responsibility
of the State launching the “object” into outer space
to the rest of the international community. At the
same time, at this stage, the rule of registration of
space launches concerned only States and did not
regulate the space activities of private companies,
individuals, and non-governmental organizations.
It should be noted that all of the above innovations
of the UN General Assembly had a very great impact
on the further development of space activities.
However, from a legal point of view, the most
important element of this Resolution was the
recommendation according to which International
law, including the Charter of the United Nations,
applies to outer space and celestial bodies” (item
“a” of paragraph 1 of article “A”)[13].
Thus, the UN General Assembly for the rst time
opened up about the regulation of relations among
participants in space activities and jurisdiction,
inviting States to regulate their relations in outer
space and on celestial bodies based on existing
international law.
However, despite many positive aspects, this
Resolution also proposed several new and very
controversial provisions for space activities.
For example, the UN General Assembly proposed
that “communication by means of satellites should
be available to the nations of the world ... on a
global and non-discriminatory basis” (preamble of
article “D”)[13].
This proposal is fully consistent with the initiative
to create a useful Universe. However, unfortunately,
the resolution does not contain an explanation
of the term “availability” and the method of its
implementation, which allowed each State to
interpret it at its discretion.
Nevertheless, to support this idea, the UN
General Assembly set its bodies another serious
task “to make allocations of radio frequency bands
for outer space activities” (paragraph 1 of article
“D”)[13], which later played an important role in the
development of telecommunications.
However, the most controversial and contradictory
is the provision of this Resolution, which states
that Outer space and celestial bodies are free for
exploration and use by all States in conformity with
international law and are not subject to national
appropriation” (item “b” of paragraph 1 of article
“A”)[13].
In essence, this provision contains three
dierent legal assumptions, each of which describes
a separate type of participation in space activities.
The rst one is “outer space and celestial bodies
are free for exploration by all States in conformity
with international law”[13] which describes the idea
of free exploration of the Universe.
The second formulation says that outer space
and celestial bodies are free for use by all States in
conformity with international law”[13] and describes
a new initiative that assumes that states can use the
Universe.
The third assumption, according to which “outer
space and celestial bodies are not subject to national
appropriation”[13], describes the Universe as a free
territory that can never belong to the States.
Even though all these three formulations are
contained in one sentence, it is easy to notice that
the second and third formulations of this provision
contradict each other and are mutually exclusive.
On the one hand, the third formulation restricts
States in their ability to appropriate outer space and
celestial bodies.
On the other hand, the second formulation,
taking into account the availability of opportunities
for States to carry out space activities for their
benet (the UN GA Resolution 1472), actually gives
States the right to freely use Outer space and
celestial bodies for their benet. In turn, free use
for their benet means that States can use outer
space and celestial bodies, which they do not even
formally own and have no right to own.
That is, already at this stage there are legal
conicts in the eld of regulation of space activities
as follows: “are not subject to national appropriation”
and “free for use” as well as “the betterment of
mankind” and “the benet of States”.
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
588 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
2.5. The UN GA Resolution 1802. The next
resolution, which concerned space activities, was
the UN GA Resolution 1802.
This time, the UN General Assembly once again
drew increased attention to the need for the legal
regulation of relations among States in Outer space
based on international law.
First of all, the main tasks related to space
activities and subject to priority solution were
identied (paragraph 1 of the article “I”), namely:
improvement of basic legal principles governing
the activities of States in the exploration and use
of outer space”, establishment of liability for
space vehicle accidents, coordination of conditions
providing assistance to return of astronauts and
space vehicles”[14].
From the above tasks, it becomes clear that
the UN General Assembly continued to promote its
idea of allowing States to freely use Outer space.
At the same time, such actions have created an
even greater imbalance in favor of States and to the
detriment of “the betterment of mankind”.
Nevertheless, this resolution also contains many
positive aspects.
For example, the UN General Assembly outlined
the need to establish responsibility for space
activities, for starters, the liability for space vehicle
accidents” (paragraph 1 of the article “I”)[14].
Also, the UN General Assembly again drew
attention to the need for events that could expand
cooperation in space activities. First of all, attention
was called to the need to support and strengthen
cooperation among States on the implementation
of international programs described in the report of
the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space
(paragraphs 1 and 3 of article “II”)[14], including
in the eld of atmospheric science research”
(paragraph 2 of article “III”)[14].
Additionally, the UN General Assembly once
again brought up the subject of creating accessible
satellite communication on a global scale for the
expansion ... and facilitating contact among the
people of the world” (paragraph 2 of article “IV”)
[14]. However, this time again the Resolution did
not specify the conditions for the availability of such
a communication.
In turn, considering initiatives for cooperation in
space activities and the creation of a useful Universe
for “the betterment of mankind”, it turned out to be
a very interesting and promising idea to create a
network of new man-made objects of space activity
on the Earth’s geomagnetic equator to launch
sounding rockets under the leadership of the United
Nations “rocket launching facilities” (paragraphs
4-7 of article “II”). According to the UN General
Assembly, the implementation of this task would
contribute to scientic progress and international
cooperation in the eld of space exploration as well
as a benet by providing opportunity for valuable
practical training for interested users” (paragraph 4
of article “II”)[14].
In this case, it is interesting that voicing this idea
the UN General Assembly did not limit the prospect
of using “rocket launching facilities” and outer
space only by States and only for the benet of
States, but oered participation in space activities
to any interested entities (that is, self-sucient
individuals). It should be noted that, rst of all,
this is the merit of the United States delegate, who
insisted on such a perspective when discussing this
resolution[2, p. 149].
In addition, separately, it is necessary to draw
attention to the fact that this resolution includes
information on a new subject of space activities,
which the UN General Assembly called the
“astronaut” (paragraph 1 of the article “I”)[14].
At the same time, this resolution did not address
issues related to the exploration and use of “celestial
bodies”, and did not address issues related to the
regulation of relations with non-State participants of
space activities, but focused only on the regulation
of relations among States in “Outer space”.
2.6. Treaty banning nuclear weapon tests
in the Atmosphere, in outer space and under
water. In 1962 one of the most terrible events in
the history of space exploration took place the
nuclear test in near-Earth orbit. A 1.4 megaton
nuclear test (USA) 400 km above Earth created such
large EMP emissions that it disabled seven satellites
in low earth orbit[17, p. 418]. These actions almost
led to the destruction of the Earth’s orbital space
and irreparable damage to the Earth.
The consequences of this test for some time
cooled the military ardor of competing states.
As a result, this led to the fact that on August 5,
1963, the three most powerful nuclear states of that
time (the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the
United States of America, and the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) signed Treaty
No. 6964. Subsequently, this treaty was also signed
by many other states.
Treaty No. 6964 is the rst international
(interstate) treaty directly related to outer space.
The main aspect of this Treaty is the provisions
of paragraph 1 of Article 1, according to which “Each
of the Parties to this Treaty undertakes to prohibit,
to prevent, and not to carry out any nuclear weapon
test explosion, or any other nuclear explosion, at
any place under its jurisdiction or control: (a) in
the atmosphere; beyond its limits, including outer
space; or under water, including territorial waters or
high seas; or (b) in any other environment if such
explosion causes radioactive debris to be present
outside the territorial limits of the State under whose
jurisdiction or control such explosion is conducted
...”[20].
Also, according to the provisions of paragraph 2
of Article 1 of this Treaty, the participating States
589
undertook as follows Each of the Parties to this
Treaty undertakes furthermore to refrain from
causing, encouraging, or in any way participating
in, the carrying out of any nuclear weapon test
explosion, or any other nuclear explosion, anywhere
which would take place in any of the environments
described, or have the eect referred to, in
paragraph 1 of this Article”[20].
In fact, by concluding this Treaty, the participating
States committed themselves not to carry out “any
nuclear weapon test explosion in outer space”. Thus,
they took the rst important step to conrm one
of the most basic initiatives of space activity - the
initiative to create a peaceful Universe.
However, despite the many positive aspects of
this Agreement, there are still “minor” omissions
in it. For example, it does not explicitly specify
“celestial bodies” for some unknown reason. Perhaps
the participating States did not look so far into the
future and did not consider the distant prospects of
space activities, or they specically left a loophole (a
backway) for the future for the possibility of nuclear
tests far beyond the Earth, or perhaps they planned
to continue nuclear tests on Earth, which can also be
attributed to “celestial bodies”.
However, in any case, such an “omission” is a
drawback of this Treaty, prompting nuclear-weapon
States to look for ways to use this loophole for their
benet in the arms race.
2.7. The UN GA Resolution 1884. Supporting
Treaty No. 6964, on October 17, 1963, the General
Assembly adopted a very important resolution in the
eld of disarmament - the UN GA Resolution 1884.
Frightened by the consequences of the nuclear
test, the UN General Assembly once again declared
that the exploration and use of outer space should
be only for the betterment of mankind” (preamble)
[10]. That is, the UN has again recalled that the
good of all mankind is much more important than
the benet of certain states and all space activities
should be directed only in the interests of all
mankind.
Moreover, this Resolution proposed: a) To
refrain from placing in orbit around the earth any
objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other
kinds of weapons of mass destruction, installing
such weapons on celestial bodies, or stationing
such weapons in outer space in any other manner;
b) To refrain from causing, encouraging or in any
way participating in the conduct of the upcoming
activities” (items “a” and “b” of paragraph 2)[10].
In fact, for the rst time in history, it was
proposed within the framework of the initiative to
create a peaceful Universe to begin the process of
disarmament of States by prohibiting the placement
of nuclear weapons in outer space and on celestial
bodies.
2.8. The UN GA Resolution 1963. On December
13, 1963, the UN General Assembly adopted another
resolution on International Co-operation in the
peaceful uses of outer space - the UN GA Resolution
1963.
For the most part, this resolution conrms the
previously announced principles.
However, in addition to them, the UN General
Assembly announced that in space activities it is
necessary to continue and to extend co-operative
arrangements so that all Member States can benet
from the peaceful exploration and use of outer
space” (paragraph 8 of article “II”)[12].
That is purposeful lobbying of the interests of
states has begun to the detriment of “the betterment
of mankind”. At the same time, this wording also
contains notes of political blackmail in the context of
the fact that only the UN member States can benet
from the exploration and use of outer space, which
does not belong to anyone. After such a statement,
states that have not become members of the UN will
want to join the UN, and the UN member states will
be afraid to withdraw from it, even if they disagree
with the general UN policy.
Moreover, this lobbying is beginning to acquire a
selective character, since the UN General Assembly
announced in this resolution the existence of
benet which all Member States would enjoy by
participation in international programmes of co-
operation in this eld” (preamble)[12].
In other words, only those States that participate
in international space programs will receive
benets. That is, those states that have money and
technical capabilities will receive these advantages.
Accordingly, poor and underdeveloped States that
are unable to participate in space activities are
automatically excluded from this list of States that
can receive benets.
Thus, the initiative on a useful Universe is
purposefully shifting in favor of the UN member
States that participate in international space
programs. What kind of “the benet of mankind”
can we even talk about in this case?
2.9. The Declaration of Legal Principles.
However, the most important event that took place
on December 13, 1963, was the adoption by the UN
General Assembly of the rst strategic document on
the regulation of space activities - the Declaration of
Legal Principles.
This Declaration replaced direct negotiations
and agreements that previously took place only
among space superpowers[5, p. 16]. Many even
refer to this Declaration as the “magna carta of
the international law of outer space”[5, p. 14].
Although this Declaration had a great impact on the
subsequent development of space activities, this is
still an exaggeration.
2.9.1. Perhaps the most important provisions
of this Declaration are the provisions arming
the exploration and use of outer space for
peaceful purposes” (preamble)[11] as well as
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
590 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
the exploration and use of outer space in interest
of maintaining international peace and security
and promoting international co-operation and
understanding” (paragraph 4)[11] along with the
prohibition of propaganda of war in space activities
(reference in the preamble to the UN General
Assembly Resolution No. 110, adopted by the UN GA
during its 2nd session at the 108th plenary meeting,
3 Nov. 1947[1].
These provisions signicantly supplemented
the description and expanded the understanding
of the peaceful Universe initiative as well as nally
approved the main strategy of cooperation in space
activities.
At the same time, it is easy to notice that the
UN General Assembly, while announcing peaceful
principles of space activities, is getting used to
guring out only outer space and not mentioning
celestial bodies as separate spatial and territorial
units.
2.9.2. The following important provisions of
this Declaration underline the common interest of
all mankind in the progress of the exploration and
use of outer space” (preamble) as well as that “the
exploration and use of outer space should be carried
on for the betterment of mankind ... (preamble),
and that the exploration and use of outer space
shall be carried on for the benet and in the interests
of all mankind” (paragraph 1)[11].
Thus, the UN General Assembly and the States
that signed the Declaration conrmed the initiative
to create a useful Universe with a special focus on
“the benet of mankind”.
However, at the same time, the Declaration
also contains provisions according to which the
exploration and use of outer space should be carried
on for the benet of States irrespective of their
degree of economic or scientic development”
(preamble)[11], and also “Outer space and celestial
bodies are free for ... use by all States on a basis of
equality and by international law” (paragraph 2)[11].
This means that the Declaration contains both
essentially opposite provisions and goals: not
subject to national appropriation ... by means of
use” (paragraph 3) and free for use” (paragraph
2) as well as “the benet and in the interests of all
mankind” (paragraph 1) and “the benet of States”
(preamble).
Hence, it can be concluded that at this stage the
conict between legal and moral principles of space
activities has already begun to acquire an ocial
and international character.
At the same time, while continuing to lobby their
interests, the states once again signed a document
on the use of outer space and celestial bodies for
their benet and, accordingly, to the detriment of
the benet of mankind.
Hiding behind attractive and loud slogans about
the impossibility of States appropriating “outer
space” and “celestial bodies”, actually with the help
of this Declaration, the UN made the rst attempt at
their legal colonization.
2.9.3. Equally important are the provisions
of the Declaration, which state that Outer space
and celestial bodies are not subject to national
appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means
of use or occupation, or by any other means”
(paragraph 3)[11] as well as that “Outer space and
celestial bodies are free for exploration ... by all
States on a basis of equality and in accordance with
international law” (paragraph 2)[11].
Thus, the UN General Assembly and the States
that signed the Declaration retained the initiative
on a free Universe (although the previous initiative
“free for use by all States” contradicts this initiative).
At the same time, the Declaration of Legal
Principles attributed “occupation” and “use” to the
list of actions that can be regarded as “appropriation”
of outer space and celestial bodies.
However, at the same time, the Declaration of
Legal Principles left a lot of questions on this topic.
Firstly, remains unclear whether this provision
applies to the planet Earth, which from a geophysical
point of view is also a celestial body.
Secondly, it lines indistinct what the phrase
outer space and celestial bodies are not subject
to national appropriation ... by means of use”
means. What exactly does the use of outer space
and celestial bodies process mean? This becomes
especially incomprehensible in the context of the
statements of the UN General Assembly in previous
Resolutions (1721, 1802, and 1963) on the free
use of outer space and celestial bodies by States
as well as in the context of similar statements in
the Declaration of Legal Principles. After all, it is
clear to everyone that by launching a space vehicle
into space and to celestial bodies, de facto states
are already using outer space and these celestial
bodies.
In addition, the document does not contain
any provisions regulating the activities of private
and non-governmental entities of space activities
(even those who participate in the creation of a
space vehicle on Earth). This means that the above-
described prohibition on the appropriation of outer
space and celestial bodies did not apply to private
and non-governmental organizations.
Also, it should be noted that this Declaration
could not directly consolidate the right of free access
to outer space and celestial bodies for everyone, but
allowed only States to act this way.
Moreover, through this Declaration, States have
tried to signicantly limit the capabilities of non-
governmental organizations, pointing out that “The
activities of non-governmental entities in outer
space shall require authorization and continuing
supervision by the State concerned” (paragraph 5)
[11].
591
That is an attempt was made to put all space
activities under state control and turn non-
governmental organizations into pro-government
organizations.
2.9.4. At the same time, the positive aspect of
this Declaration is that the UN General Assembly
continued to promote the idea of cooperation among
States in space activities. Once again, the proposal
was voiced that In the exploration and use of outer
space, States shall be guided by the principle of co-
operation and mutual assistance and shall conduct
all their activities in outer space with due regard
for the corresponding interests of other States”
(paragraph 6)[11].
In essence, this provision was created for only
one purpose to organize global international
cooperation in this area.
2.9.5. In addition, in continuation of the idea of
cooperation, the Declaration laid the foundations
for the organization of mutual assistance among
the subjects of space activities provided States
shall regard astronauts as envoys of mankind in
outer space, and shall render to them all possible
assistance in the event of accident, distress, or
emergency landing on the territory of a foreign
State or on the high seas” (paragraph 9)[11].
However, in this case, the policy of mutual
assistance was formed very narrowly and extended
only to relations among states.
2.9.6. Also, the Declaration established a rule
for the return of “space vehicle” and their parts
that were outside the jurisdiction of the state of
registration, namely, Such objects or component
parts found beyond the limits of the State of registry
shall be returned to that State, which shall furnish
identifying data upon request prior to return”
(paragraph 7)[11].
A similar rule was also established for astronauts
providing that Astronauts who make such a landing
shall be safely and promptly returned to the State of
registry of their space vehicle” (paragraph 9)[11].
2.9.7. In addition, attempts were made to dene
and establish the jurisdiction of the subjects of
space activities and the legal basis for regulating the
relationship among them.
Thus, once again it was pointed out that The
activities of States in the exploration and use of
outer space shall be carried on in accordance with
international law, including the Charter of the United
Nations ...” (paragraph 4)[11].
At the same time, it was also indicated that “The
State on whose registry an object launched into
outer space is carried shall retain jurisdiction and
control over such object, and any personnel thereon,
while in outer space. Ownership of objects launched
into outer space, and of their component parts, is
not aected by their passage through outer space
or by their return to the earth” (paragraph 7)[11].
Therefore, based on this Declaration, the
jurisdiction of States was extended to objects
belonging to them in outer space – that is, beyond
their territories on planet Earth.
However, it is worth noting that this rule does
not regulate relations among astronauts outside
the space vehicle as well as relations among private
and non-governmental entities of space activities.
Moreover, this rule does not apply to any relations
on the territory of celestial bodies.
2.9.8. At the same time, it should be noted that
at last the UN General Assembly has established one
of the most important conditions for space activities,
namely, the responsibility for space activities:
“States bear international responsibility for
national activities in outer space, whether carried on
by governmental agencies or by non-governmental
entities, and for assuring that national activities
are carried on in conformity with the principles set
forth in the present Declaration… When activities
are carried on in outer space by an international
organization, responsibility for compliance with the
principles set forth in this Declaration shall be borne
by the international organization and by the States
participating in it” (paragraph 5)[11].
It was also found that Each State which
launches or procures the launching of an object into
outer space, and each State from whose territory
or facility an object is launched, is internationally
liable for damage to a foreign State or to its natural
or judicial persons by such object or its component
parts on the earth, in air space, or in outer space”
(item 8)[11].
According to this condition, States and
international organizations that carried out space
activities in violation of the principles of this
Declaration as well as States that caused damage by
their space activities could be held liable. However,
it should be noted that this Declaration completely
lacks responsibility for space activities related to
celestial bodies.
The following was also established: If a State
has reason to believe that an outer space activity
or experiment planned by it or its nationals would
cause potentially harmful interference with activities
of other States in the peaceful exploration and
use of outer space, it shall undertake appropriate
international consultations before proceeding with
any such activity or experiment. A State which has
reason to believe that an outer space activity or
experiment planned by another State would cause
potentially harmful interference with activities in
the peaceful exploration and use of outer space
may request consultation concerning the activity or
experiment” (paragraph 6)[11].
In turn, it is necessary to understand that all of
the above rules will work only if all States openly
and honestly report on their space activities.
2.9.9. However, the most signicant moment of
the Declaration of Legal Principles can be called the
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
592 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
provisions which read as follows “States shall regard
astronauts as envoys of mankind in outer space”
(paragraph 9)[11].
The UN General Assembly and the States that
signed the Declaration, by this provision, secured for
the astronaut the legal status of a subject of space
activity, which does not fall under the jurisdiction of
any State (and, accordingly, does not fall under the
jurisdiction of the UN), but is “envoys of mankind”.
As a result, such an astronaut status implied
further development of elements for the settlement
of relations among astronauts in outer space.
However, at that time, this had not been performed.
3. Conclusions.
3.1. Tasks of space activity. In the process of
developing space activities, States under the auspices
of the UN gradually formed a list of tasks, the solution
of which was necessary for the implementation of
further international space activities.
3.1.1. Probably, the rst and most important task
at this stage may be the task of forming international
bodies and organizations on the regulation of space
activities.
Although this task was not announced directly in
the resolutions, its implementation was carried out
constantly, through the creation and/or involvement
in space activities of many international bodies and
organizations.
First of all, based on the UN GA Resolution 1348,
the “Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space” (hereinafter referred to as the Committee on
Space Research, COSPAR) was established.
Further, based on the UN GA Resolution 1721,
such international organizations as the “Economic
Council”, “The Social Council”, “The Special Fund”,
“The Expanded Program of Technical Assistance”,
“The World Meteorological Organization”, “The
International Telecommunication Union” were
involved in space activities.
Also, it was proposed to participate in the
space activities of a scientic non-governmental
organization, namely, the “International Council of
Scientic Unions”.
3.1.2. The task of continuing activities on the
research, exploration, and use of outer space may
be referred to as the second most important task,
which in various variations is repeatedly mentioned
in all the UN General Assembly Resolutions.
3.1.3. Also, already at the initial stage, in
the UN GA Resolution 1348, the UN General
Assembly declared the need for the development
of programmes of international and scientic co-
operation”, organization of the mutual exchange
and dissemination of information on outer space
research”, co-ordination of national research
programmes for the study of outer space”[8].
Thus, the third task of space activity was formed,
which in general can be designated as international
cooperation in outer space activities.
Later, it was repeatedly noted in various UN
General Assembly Resolutions and the Declaration
of Legal Principles.
3.1.4. And of course, one should not obscure
the fact that already in the UN GA Resolution 1348,
the UN General Assembly pointed out the need
to establish the nature of legal problems”[8].
Subsequently, under the UN GA Resolution 1802
(which was mainly devoted to legal issues), the
necessity to elaborate of basic legal principles
governing the activities of States in the exploration
and use of outer space”[14] was stated.
In addition, it should be noted that the states
quickly realized the threat posed by space vehicle and
their parts for the population and aircraft performing
passenger and commercial ights. In this regard,
the UN GA Resolution No. 1802 indicated the need to
establish liability for space vehicle accidents”[14].
Thus, it became necessary to create legal elements
of responsibility for space activities.
Also, the issue of the return of the space vehicle
and its parts that fell to Earth as well as the astronauts
who landed outside the territorial jurisdiction of their
states of registration began to be discussed almost
immediately. In this regard, it became necessary to
develop rules according to which states assist to
return of astronauts and space vehicles”[14] (the
UN GA Resolution No. 1802).
All these actions testied to the emergence of
a new most important task of space activities to
develop space law.
The rst result of solving this problem was the
adoption of the Declaration of Legal Principles,
which was signed by the majority of the UN member
states.
3.1.5. Later on, the tasks acquired a more
substantive character.
Thus, under the UN GA Resolution 1721, the UN
General Assembly pointed out that “communication
by means of satellites should be available to
the nations of the world ... on a global and non-
discriminatory basis”[13], as well as the need to
make allocations of radio frequency bands for outer
space activities”[13] was outlined. At the same
time, the UN GA Resolution 1802 said that the result
of the available satellite communication would be
the expansion ... and facilitating contact among the
people of the world”[14].
Therefore, the UN General Assembly formed
the fth important task of space activities, the
purpose of which was to create accessible satellite
communication.
Unfortunately, despite the loftiness of this goal,
the availability of satellite communication for all
states does not mean that it is accessible to all
people.
Moreover, this task was formulated by the
UN General Assembly either inaccurately or not
completely.
593
As a result, it remains unclear what the
concept of “satellite communication availability”
means. Perhaps this means that any state has
the right to launch satellites and organize satellite
communication, or maybe it means that any state
has the right to use satellite communication created
by other states. Although, to achieve the goal
of the benet of mankind”, this concept should
mean that for every person on the planet, satellite
communication should be either free or should cost
the same price for all people (based on the payment
possibilities of the population of the poorest state).
However, at this stage, this issue has not been
resolved and remained only as an idea.
3.1.6. And of course, one cannot ignore the
proposal of the UN General Assembly made in the UN
GA Resolution 1802 to create a network of “rocket
launching facilities” (polygons) on the geomagnetic
equator of the Earth to launch sounding rockets
under the leadership of the UN.
The solution to this task in the future would make
it possible to achieve one of the most important
goals of space activities – to make space activities
accessible to everyone.
3.1.7. Separately, it is necessary to draw attention
to some omissions of the UN General Assembly at
this stage. For example, the task of determining
the spatial and territorial jurisdiction of States in
terms of the delimitation of the airspace of States
and outer space has not been set. Also, the issue of
regulating the relationship among astronauts, private
companies, and non-governmental organizations in
outer space was not raised at all.
3.2. The concept of cooperation and mutual
assistance in space activities.
At the same time, it should be noted that despite
many dierences in approaches to the organization
and development of space activities, the UN managed
to consolidate states at some point and begin the
formation of one of the most important concepts
in this area, which can be conditionally called the
“Concept of cooperation and mutual assistance in
space activities”.
Thus, already in the UN GA Resolution 1348,
the UN General Assembly drew attention to the
great importance of international co-operation in
the study and utilization of outer space for peaceful
purposes”[8], and to the fact “that such co-operation
will promote mutual understanding and the
strengthening of friendly relations among people”[8].
In this regard, the UN General Assembly stated that
the development of programmes of international
and scientic co-operation in the peaceful uses of
outer space should be vigorously pursued”[8].
However, the most important proposal within
the framework of this Concept was the proposal “to
avoid the extension of present national rivalries into
this new eld” (preamble of the UN GA Resolution
No. 1348)[8].
Further, to implement the “Concept of Cooperation
and mutual assistance in space activities”, the UN
General Assembly adopted the decision to establish
“an ad hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space”[8], which was immediately assigned many
tasks for organizing international cooperation.
However, initially, there was virtually no
cooperation in space activities. On the contrary,
after the launch of the USSR space vehicle with
Yuriy Gagarin on April 12, 1961, a new era in the
space confrontation between the USSR and the
USA called the “Moon Race” began[15, p. 355].
At the same time, the United States did not even
hide the fact that NASA’s international cooperation
should be carried out only taking into account the
interests and benets of the United States, and no
other countries[6, p. 120]. As reported by Kenneth
S. Pedersen, NASA even developed its principles for
organizing international cooperation in the interests
of the United States, which, however, have never
been codied and formalized[6, p. 121]. According
to these principles, each party to the agreement
develops and provides discrete pieces of hardware or
clearly dened services using its technology, so that
cooperation takes place across ‘clean interfaces’[6,
p. 121]. At the same time, each party nances
its work and any exchange of funds is held to an
absolute minimum, and NASA retains overall project
management and operational control[6, p. 121].
Nevertheless, we shall pay tribute to the
Assembly, who continued to promote the idea of
cooperation and by December 14, 1962, presented
its report with a list of promising international
cooperation programs, including in the eld of
“atmospheric science research” as stated in the UN
GA Resolution 1802.
Moreover, in the same Resolution, the UN General
Assembly proposed that States create a network
of “rocket launching facilities” (polygons) on the
geomagnetic equator of the Earth for launching
sounding rockets under the leadership of the UN,
which would allow everyone to participate in the
exploration of space and our planet.
This had its eect already in 1965 when the
United Nations sponsorship was granted to the
Thumb Equatorial Rocket Launching Station (TERLS)
in India, and later, when United Nations sponsorship
was granted to the Argentine Launching Station
named CELPA Mar del Plata[5, p. 14].
Further, the Declaration of Legal Principles
also stated the need to carry out the exploration
and use of outer space in interest of maintaining
international peace and security and promoting
international co-operation and understanding”[11].
Moreover, the initiative of the UN General
Assembly on international cooperation was
enshrined in the form of one of the legal principles
in this Declaration, namely, “In the exploration and
use of outer space, States shall be guided by the
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
594 Електронне наукове видання «Аналітично-порівняльне правознавство»
principle of co-operation and mutual assistance and
shall conduct all their activities in outer space with
due regard for the corresponding interests of other
States”[11].
At the same time, it is necessary to pay attention
to the fact that none of the proposals for international
cooperation take into account celestial bodies.
As can be concluded from the above documents,
the UN General Assembly and the Member States
stubbornly did not discuss the issue of cooperation in
the eld of research and the use of celestial bodies.
Hence, it can be assumed that the leaders of the
states specically avoided such cooperation, hoping
to colonize celestial bodies on their own. That is,
they continued to act based on colonial remnants of
the past and did not learn to act for the benet of
all mankind.
Taking into account the above, as of the end
of 1963, this “Concept of cooperation and mutual
assistance in space activities” could be formulated
as follows:
“The exploration and use of outer space should
be only for peaceful purposes, in the interest of
maintaining international peace and security, the
strengthening of friendly relations among peoples,
and promoting international cooperation and mutual
understanding. In the exploration and use of outer
space, States shall avoid the extension of national
rivalries, shall be guided by the principle of co-
operation and mutual assistance, and shall conduct
all their activities in outer space with due regard for
the corresponding interests of other States”.
In essence, compliance with this Concept was
supposed to lead to global international cooperation
and free States from competition in the space race.
At the same time, as Yun Zhao correctly noted, such
cooperation should have been carried out on conditions
of genuine justice and took into account the real
technical potential of developing and underdeveloped
states and the assistance that technologically
developed states can provide them[16].
However, unfortunately, despite the noble
initiatives of this Concept, no global cooperation,
except for some aspects, has been observed to
this day. Moreover, competition in space activities
has only intensied. States often do not exchange
technologies, but trade them or close access to
them. As Jonathan F. Galloway correctly noted, the
cooperation of most states has turned into a side
game, while the main technologically advanced
states are playing a zero-sum game in which
there must necessarily be a winner and a loser[4].
Perhaps the reason for such actions of states was
the strategy of the behavior of the United States,
which eventually turned into the principle of the
space race: “Who controls low-Earth orbit controls
near-Earth space. Who controls near-Earth space
dominates Terra. Who dominates Terra determines
the destiny of humankind”[18, p. 6–7].
Thus, this Concept has remained a concept
without turning into real principles, conditions,
and rules, except for attempts to organize mutual
assistance and interaction in space activities.
At the same time, within the framework of this
Concept, an uncertain attempt was made to build a
Model of mutual assistance in the implementation of
space activities by States.
The rst step was a statement about the return
of the landed astronauts, which was stated only in
1963 in the Declaration of Legal Principles, namely,
States shall regard astronauts as envoys of mankind
in outer space, and shall render to them all possible
assistance in the event of accident, distress, or
emergency landing on the territory of a foreign State
or on the high seas. Astronauts who make such a
landing shall be safely and promptly returned to the
State of registry of their space vehicle”[11].
In the same Declaration of Legal Principles, it was
also indicated the return of “objects launched into
outer space”, namely, Such objects or component
parts found beyond the limits of the State of registry
shall be returned to that State, which shall furnish
identifying data upon request prior to return”[11].
In general, this model can be formulated as
follows:
“States shall render to astronauts all possible
assistance in the event of accident, distress, or
emergency landing on the territory of a foreign
State or the high seas. Astronauts who make such
a landing shall be safely and promptly returned to
the State of registry of their space vehicle. Objects
launched into outer space or component parts found
beyond the limits of the State of registry shall be
returned to that State, which shall furnish identifying
data upon request prior to return”.
However, this is all that has been done on this
topic. The terms of mutual assistance were not
drawn up in the form of treaties and had neither
a mechanism for execution, nor deadlines for
execution, nor a mechanism for compensating the
costs of such execution. These statements sounded
more like requests not as terms of cooperation,
and assumed only voluntary assistance, without
observing any procedures and deadlines.
At the same time, it is interesting that this model
reported the need for mutual assistance only among
states and only about “objects launched into outer
space or parts” and “astronauts” that landed on the
territory of other states or the high seas. That is,
it did not provide for the processes of interaction
and mutual assistance among states in outer space
about the same “objects launched into outer space”
and “astronauts”, and also did not provide for the
process of interaction and mutual assistance among
the astronauts. Moreover, this model did not consider
at all the issue of participation in the interaction and
mutual assistance of private and non-governmental
space activities participants.
595
3.3. General conclusion. According to the
results of this study, it is necessary to say that as
of the end of 1963, the UN General Assembly had
taken many steps in the eld of regulation of space
activities. Although not all ideas were implemented
and not all proposals had a positive context for the
development and welfare of mankind, all these
actions can be considered an important attempt to
resolve relationships in outer space and on celestial
bodies.
It can be concluded that, in fact, during this
period considering the international community it
was already possible to speak about the existence
of understanding of the main tasks and concepts
of space activities as well as the contradictions and
unresolved issues in this area.
REFERENCES:
1. The UN General Assembly (2nd sess. 108th
plenary meeting). Measures to be taken
against propaganda and the inciters of a
new war. Resolution. 110. URL: https://
digitallibrary.un.org/record/209883.
2. Asamoah O. Y. Declaration of Legal Principles
Governing the Activities of States in the
Exploration and Use of Outer Space. The
Legal Signicance of the Declarations of the
General Assembly of the United Nations.
Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands, 1966. P.
129–160. DOI:10.1007/978-94-011-9495-
2_12.
3. Charter of the United Nations and statute
of the international court of justice. Blue
limited edition. New York : United Nations
Publications, 2015.
4. Galloway J. F. Game theory and the law
and policy of outer space. Space Policy.
Vol. 20, 2. P. 87–90. DOI:10.1016/j.
spacepol.2004.02.006.
5. Ogunbanwo O. O. International Law and
Outer Space Activities. Dordrecht : Springer
Netherlands, 1975. 272 p.
6. Pedersen K. S. The changing face of
international space cooperation. Space Policy.
Vol. 2, № 2. P. 120–137. DOI:10.1016/0265-
9646(86)90058-5.
7. The UN General Assembly (12th. Sess. 716th
plenary meeting). Regulation, limitation
and balanced reduction of all armed forces
and all armaments; conclusion of an
international convention (treaty) on the
reduction of armaments and the prohibition
of atomic, hydrogen and other weapons of
mass destruction. Resolution. № 1148. URL:
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/207243.
8. The UN General Assembly (13th. Sess. 792nd
plenary meeting). Question of the peaceful
use of outer space. Resolution. № 1348. URL:
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/206866.
9. The UN General Assembly (14th. Sess.
856th plenary meeting). International co-
operation in the peaceful uses of outer
space. Resolution. 1472. URL: https://
digitallibrary.un.org/record/206356.
10. The UN General Assembly (18th. Sess.
1244th plenary meeting). Question of general
and complete disarmament. Resolution.
1884. URL: https://digitallibrary.un.org/
record/203960.
11. The UN General Assembly (18th. Sess.
1280th plenary meeting). Declaration of
Legal Principles Governing the Activities of
States in the Exploration and Use of Outer
Space. 1962. URL: https://digitallibrary.
un.org/record/203965.
12. The UN General Assembly (18th. Sess.
1280th plenary meeting). International
Co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer
space. Resolution. 1963. URL: https://
digitallibrary.un.org/record/203966.
13. The UN General Assembly (16th. Sess.).
International co-operation in the peaceful
uses of outer space. Resolution. 1721. URL:
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/665195.
14. The UN General Assembly (17th.
Sess.1192nd plenary meeting). International
co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer
space. Resolution. 1802. URL: https://
digitallibrary.un.org/record/204272.
15. Smith M. S. The rst quarter-century of
spaceight. Futures. Vol. 14, 5. P. 353–
373. DOI:10.1016/0016-3287(82)90056-8.
16. Zhao Y. The Role of bilateral and
multilateral agreements in international
space cooperation. Space Policy. Vol.
36, 05.2016. P. 12–18. DOI:10.1016/j.
spacepol.2016.02.007.
17. Beard J. M. Soft Law’s Failure on the Horizon:
The International Code of Conduct for Outer
Space Activities. Vol. 38, Issue 2. P. 335–424.
18. Dolman E. C. Astropolitik: classical geopolitics
in the Space Age. London ; Portland, OR :
Frank Cass, 2002. 208 p. [TL788.4 .D685
2002]. (“Cass series--strategy and history”
Series).
19. Lai A. K. The cold war, the space race, and
the law of outer space: space for peace.
Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY
: Routledge, 2021. [KZD1145 .L35 2021].
(“Routledge studies in modern history”
Series).
20. Treaty banning nuclear weapon tests
in the Atmosphere, in outer space and
under water. No. 6964. Signed at Moscow,
on 5 August 1963. UNTC. URL: https://
treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.
aspx?objid=08000002801313d9.
РОЗДІЛ ХІ. МІЖНАРОДНЕ ПРАВО
... To date, many scientists, diplomats, and honored lawyers have studied the evolution of the process of regulating space activities, for example, Malysheva N. R., The results of these studies were published in the articles "Regulation of space activities during the 1958-1963 period» [10], "Space Law, Subjects and Jurisdictions: ...
Article
Full-text available
The research presents new perceptions on the process of regulating space activities based on a synthesis of innovative approaches to regulating such activities and analysis of documents adopted by the international community in this area over the entire period of development of space activities. First of all, the research raises the issue of the format of the existing Space Law (including the form of Conventionalis stipulatio) as well as the question of the possibility of the emergence in the future of several new legal systems to regulate space activities. In this regard, the list of subjects and objects of space activities and space law is revised, and options for their classification and new interpretations are proposed. In addition, at this stage of the research, a proposal is presented for applying a new approach to organizing the legal space of the Universe taking into account the principles of “domestic room” and “alien room”. At the same time, this proposal also includes the use of new methods to determine the spatial-territorial jurisdiction of States. Thus, instead of searching for the border between airspace and outer space (which has not yet been successful), the question of the possibility of dividing the entire aerospace into several special layers is considered, namely, a layer of spatial security of States, a layer of spatial security of humanity, and open space. Additionally, the research emphasizes the gradual formation in 1958 – 1963 of the first four most important General Principles for Space Activities, which in the future may become the basis for the development of Outer Space Public Law aimed at the benefit of all humanity. According to the author, the findings of this research can be useful to form a new insight into the process of regulating space activities and develop new forms and types of Space Law that will change the international situation in this area for the better.
... Based on the results of the study, published in the articles "Regulation of space activities during the 1958-1963 period» [13] and "Space Law, Subjects and Jurisdictions: pre-1963 period" [14], Marinich V.K. defined the concept of the Outer Space Law and concluded that the Outer Space Law is only one of the possible legal systems that may be the elements of the global Outer Space Law. ...
Article
Full-text available
This is the fourth article in the study related to analyzing the process of regulation of space activities. Considering the results of previous studies of documents adopted by the international community during the 1958-1963 period in the regulation of space activities, this article continues the presentation of the study of the process of Outer Space Public Law development. The article describes the initiatives of the international community (including the UN General Assembly) connected with the regulation of relations among States in matters of the use of outer space and celestial bodies. First of all, it describes the process of gradual formation of one of the most important international principles of Public Space Law, which can be attributed to the group of General Principles of Space Activities, namely, "The Principle of a Useful Cosmos”. Also, legal conflicts and difficulties that arose at the initial stage of the formation of this principle as well as the consequences to which they could lead are described. In addition, the article describes the process of formation of another very important principle of Public Space Law that can also be included in the group of General Principles of Space Activity, namely, "The Principle of Space Traffic”, which at that time already consisted of three special principles formed under the influence of specific international initiatives. Thus, the initiative to streamline space vehicle launches into outer space formed "The Principle of launch registration”. The initiative to organize interaction among States regarding astronauts and space vehicles launched into space formed "The Principle of mutual assistance” In turn, the initiative to organize the safety of space activities formed "the Principle of Responsibility”. At the same time, all these principles were developed only in the form of Conventionalis stipulatio, which were mainly set out in the Resolutions and Declarations of the UN General Assembly. Considering the above, it is necessary to pay attention again to the fact that the researcher should not expect from the "Outer Space Law” the form in which this "Law” is accustomed to consider, due to the exclusivity of the environment to which this new "Law” was formed.
Article
Full-text available
The article presents the relevant results of an analysis of the process of regulating private space activities. At the same time, the separate focus is on the development of space law and the main problems that currently exist in space law, including those related to the confrontation between public space law and private space law, for example: regulation of space traffic; determination of ownership of objects obtained as a result of space activities; mining and other aspects of commercialization of space activities. Additionally, a list of the main legal tasks in private space activities that require an early solution is identified, and the steps that have already been taken in this direction are described, namely, new variants of terminology, interpretation, and classification of objects and subjects of space activities, space law, and space legal relations as well as a new theory for determining the legal status of outer space are proposed. In the final analysis, it was concluded that it is necessary to continue research in further formation and improvement of the elements, interpretations, and structure of Space Private Law. To this end, the author proposed an option for further scientific research on the formation of the structure of Space Private Law based on the establishment and definition of the basic principles, concepts, and elements of such law. At the same time, the author identified the main goals, objectives, object, and subject of such research, and also, preliminary, determined the research methodology that is vital to obtain the most effective scientific results. According to the author, the results of the study on the formation of the structure of Space Private Law will be base for future foundations for regulating private space activities and preventing many legal conflicts.
Article
Full-text available
This is the third article in the study related to analyzing the process of regulation of space activities. Considering the results of previous studies of documents adopted by the international community during the 1958 -1963 period in the field of regulation of space activities, this article pays special attention to the formation process of Outer Space Public Law. The article describes the international community`s initiatives, including the UN General Assembly, which can be considered the first elements in the general design of Outer Space Public Law. At the same time, the form of these elements may seem non-standard and even controversial, taking into account the fact that at this stage Outer Space Public Law was just in its infancy. However, as has already been discussed in previous studies, we should not expect from the “Outer Space Law” the form in which this “Law” is accustomed to consider, due to the exclusivity of the environment to which this new “Law” was formed. Summarizing the study of legal documents on space activities during the 1958-1963 period, we can state that already in this period the first principles, concepts, and rules of space activities were formed, which led to the emergence and development of a completely new area of law, namely, the so-called Outer Space Law. At the same time, it was established that at the end of 1963, the Outer Space Public Law already existed, which mainly consisted of Conventionalis stipulatio, developed in the form of Resolutions and Declarations of the UN General Assembly. Certainly, it is necessary to recognize that the Outer Space Law had many gaps, shortcomings, and unresolved issues at the early stage of its development. However, it is these nuances that today make it possible to understand how this field of law should be further developed.
Article
On January 11, 2007, the People’s Republic of China conducted a successful test of an anti-satellite weapon against one of its own aging weather satellites that produced a massive cloud of long-lasting orbital debris in space. The test highlighted both the growing possibility that orbital debris may ultimately render space unusable for all activities there and the reality of an increasingly militarized, contested and insecure geopolitical space environment. Largely in response to this incident, and in an effort to enhance the safety, security and sustainability of space activities, the European Union developed a draft “International Code of Conduct for Activities in Outer Space” (the ICoC or the Code) in 2008. The proposed Code, which continues to be debated by the international community, is an example of a legally non-binding "soft law" instrument which also contains broad, imprecise statements of principles. While soft law has made important contributions to the legal and administrative framework that governs space, the Code does not hold such promise. Instead, this article argues that the Code is a case study in the limitations of soft law, particularly when employed as a mechanism to regulate military activities and weapons in a highly insecure environment. Moreover, it is notably ill-suited in this context and in its design to successfully address the critical problem of orbital space debris. As a soft law instrument with both soft law’s general limitations and its own particular shortcomings, the Code is an ineffective measure that distracts attention from more meaningful initiatives to reduce orbital debris while at the same time risking increasing tensions in space, diminishing the existing legal framework governing space activities, and negatively affecting the future development of space law.
Article
International cooperation has been successfully conducted in a wide range of areas in the space field. Over the past years, many bilateral and multilateral agreements have been concluded, providing solid legal basis for space cooperation. This article examines the important role of these agreements in the process of international space cooperation and put forward suggestions on how to further facilitate the conclusion of international agreements so that international space cooperation can be carried out more effectively. The article concludes that international agreements are important tools to realize international space cooperation and that we will need to further study possible means to promote international space cooperation in wider scope through the conclusion of international agreements.
International co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer space. Resolution. № 1802
  • Sess
Sess.1192nd plenary meeting). International co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer space. Resolution. № 1802. URL: https:// digitallibrary.un.org/record/204272.
The first quarter-century of spaceflight
  • M S Smith
Smith M. S. The first quarter-century of spaceflight. Futures. Vol. 14, № 5. P. 353-373. DOI:10.1016/0016-3287(82)90056-8.