Laws in Space
Maria Berishaj, Project Managing Associate
4 minute read
At some point in your childhood, you may have daydreamed about creating your own country. What you would name it, how you would run it, or even the words to the national anthem. While this was just a daydream for most of us, it was a reality for Italian engineer Giorgio Rosa.
In 1967, the construction of a 400sqm platform was funded by Rosa 11km off the coast of Rimini Italy - just outside the territorial waters of Italy. This meant the platform was of free jurisdiction, prompting a declaration of independence on May 1st, 1968 under the name Insulo de la Rozoj (“Republic of Rose Island”) with Rosa serving as President. Stocked full of entertainment through a casino, bar, and more, the micronation even had its own currency, flag, language, taxation system, and laws; a combination that garnered copious attention. While this initially came from tourists and media, the partying didn’t last long. The Italian government quickly took notice, eventually seizing the micronation on June 26th, 1968, and destroying it on February 13th, 1969.
Republic of Rose Island via Wikipedia
After Rosa brought to light this loophole, it’s no surprise that the UN soon moved the boundary of territorial waters from 6 to 11 nautical miles. As for the rest of the seas not under jurisdiction of a territory, Law of the Sea and maritime laws provide the written rules of the water. While the Law of the Sea establishes international law on the rights and duties of states in ocean environments, and maritime laws address nautical issues and private disputes, the rules of the sea are quite established. In fact, there are even degrees one can obtain in maritime law. Long has space been compared to the seas, from space marines, spaceships, and other similar terms to describe it, to nets and harpoons finding their way into space technology. Thus with the increase of human presence in space, and the similarity this bears to human expansion on the high seas, the natural question of “what are the rules for space?” arises with increasing importance.
Primary governance in space comes from the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, a declaration of loose regulations and rules negotiated in “the shadow of the Cold War.” The treaty gives freedom of exploration and use to mankind with two exceptions: (1) the moon and celestial bodies are to be used for peaceful purposes, and (2) those conducting activities in space must do so with “due regard to the corresponding interests of all other state parties to the treaty.” Specifics do arise in their prohibition of placing nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction in space, but otherwise, the terms of the treaty contain quite a bit of vagueness. Aside from this treaty, limited regulations exist yet an abundance of scenarios requiring legislation have risen. For a look into how space and civil suits have overlapped, and the results from it, read Columbia Law student Zoe Beckenstein’s article here.
Given the current state of progress in space during 1967, it is no wonder there were little to no concerns about implementing specific regulations, for only a few government entities were engaging in space activity. Neil Armstrong hadn’t even stepped foot on the moon at that point. Yet progress has advanced to the point where billionaires can now purchase a trip to space from private commercial companies. This advancement has brought attention to the lack of up-to-date rules and regulations for space, resulting in the forming of a resolution by the UN First Committee that created a working group whose goals are to “assess current and future threats to space operations, determine when behavior may be considered irresponsible, make recommendations on possible norms, rules, and principles of responsible behavior, and contribute to the negotiation of legally binding instruments” (Hanlon and Autry 2021).
So something has been done to address space activities, but how impactful is it really? A prominent challenge with this committee, and any other, is whether they actually have the authority to enforce any guidelines. Until we have police spacecraft patrolling our galaxy, taking action on something such as a rogue spacecraft requires the launch of an additional one. Additionally, as technology advances the laws must advance with it. For example, do we implement laws that apply to all of space, our galaxy, or just as far as humans can travel? In the latter case, just like with the Republic of Rose Island, all it takes is one moment of ingenuity to require a whole new assessment of the rules.
One might think “So we have an out-of-date system, what’s the big deal? It’s not like there are any problems currently happening in space.” This is not the case. From many forms of communication, GPS navigation, weather tracking & prediction, massive commerce transactions, daily commerce exchanges, and more, humankind is dependent on satellites. While the 1967 Outer Space Treaty requires parties to commit space activities in a peaceful manner with regard to all other parties, this doesn’t guarantee the safety of our needed resources. For example, in 2021 Russia destroyed one of its own satellites in an anti-satellite test, an action that might initially seem to only affect Russia, but created a massive amount of debris that poses a risk to all other space objects. While KMI is building the capabilities to non-destructively remove debris objects before accidental or intentional destruction, the problem of orbital debris won’t be solved without policy changes.
Before and after of Russian Anti-Satellite test via space.com
While the current laws in space are more focused on the security of humankind and maintaining peaceful exploration, with the advancement of technology, it might not be too long before we see new marvels that test the status quo, maybe even building their own micronation in space!
Recommended column to read next: No Borders in Space