Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-04T13:45:05.856Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Geostationary Orbit: Issues of Law and Policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Stephen Gorove
Stephen Gorove*
Affiliation:
University of Mississippi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The technological advances of the space age have opened the door toward the increasing utilization of the so-called “geostationary orbit” by satellites for telecommunication, broadcasting, and meteorological and other services. More recently, the possible utilization of the geostationary orbit by satellites to transmit solar energy to the earth has been seriously considered. The growing importance of the geostationary orbit reflected in these actual and potential uses, coupled with recent claims of sovereignty advanced by equatorial countries with respect to segments of the orbit, calls for an analysis of its international legal status and for a review of some of the U.S. policy issues.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 73 , Issue 3 , July 1979 , pp. 444 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Writings on the “geostationary orbit” and some of its legal and related implications are of relatively recent origin. They include, for instance, Busak, The Geostationary Satellite Orbit—International Cooperation or National Sovereignty?, 45 Telecommunication J. 167 (1978); Cocca, The Geostationary Orbit, Focal Point of Space Telecommunication Law, id. at 171; Cocca, Towards an Adequate Legal Regulation of the Geostationary Orbit, in Proceedings Of The 20th Colloquium on the law of outer space 193 (1978); gehrig, Geostationary Orbit—Technology and Law, in Proceedings Of The 19th Colloquium On The Law Of Outer Space 267 (1977); Gorbiel, The Legal Status of Geostationary Orbit: Some Remarks, 6 J. Space L. 171 (1973); Jeruchim, A Survey of Interference Problems and Applications to Geostationary Satellite Networks, 65 Proceedings Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers 317 (1977); Sarkar, Geostationary Orbital Positions for Space Stations, in proceedings of the 20th colloquium on the law of outer space 450 (1978); withers, effective utilization of the geostationary orbit for satellite Communication, 65 proceedings inst. electrical & electronics engineers 308 (1977). articles in foreign legal periodicals include, e.g., bueckling, rechtsprobleme des Synchronkorridors, 27 zeitschrift f. Luft- und weltraumrecht 76 (1978); Finch, The Geostationary Orbit and the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, 16 Dihitto Aereo 183 (1977).

2 For a brief review of possible uses of geostationary orbit, see UN General Assembly, Comm. on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Physical Nature and Technical Attributes of the Geostationary Orbit, Study Prepared by the Secretariat, UN Doc. A/AC. 105/203, section 5 (1977).

3 There has been a steadily growing literature on the subject. See, e.g., C. Bloomquist, a survey of satellite power Stations (PRC Systems Sciences Co., PRC R-1844, Sept. 1976); Boeing Aerospace Co., solar power satellite—system definition study, pts. i and ii, vol. 1 (d 180-22876-1, cont. no. nas9-15196, dec. 1977); econ INC., Political And Legal Implications Of Developing And Operating A Satellite Power System, Final Report (77-195-1, August 15, 1977); Glaser, Development of the Satellite Solar Power Station, in Am. Inst. Aeronautics & Astronautics, Space Manufacturing Facilities (Space Colonies) 115 (J. Grey, ed., 1977); Glaser, Solar Power Satellite Development Program, in AM. astronautical society, 36 advances in the astronautical sciences, pt. 1, the industrialization Of Space 454 (Van Patten et al. eds., 1978); S. Gorove, Studies in Space Law: Its Challenges And Prospects 205 ff. (1977); international technical services, inc., an overview of prospective organizational structures in the solar power satellite field, draft report for task ii, subtask 2: roles of governmental entities (Cont. No. 31-109-38-4387, June 30, 1978); G. K. O'neill, the high frontier: human colonies in space (1977).

4 4See Itu Radio Regulations Rr1-18, paras. 84BFA and 84RG (1976 ed.).

5 Gehrig, supra note 1, at 268.

6 Econ Inc., Final Report, supra note 3, at 60. The fundamental limit to the utilization of the geostationary orbit is the mutual interference generated by satellite networks. For an analysis, see Jeruchim, supra note 1, at 317.

7 Supra note 2, at 1.

8 Table of Artificial Satellites Launched in 1977, 45 Telecommunication J., Supp. (April 1978).

9 UN Study, supra note 2, at section 4.

10 Gehrig, supra note 1, at 70.

11 According to D. J. Withers, saturation could be delayed for a long period if various practices and principles of system design and use were internationally agreed upon and applied. See Withers, supra note 1, at 308.

12 International Telecommunication Convention of Oct. 25, 1973, Malaga-Torremolinos, Art. 33(2), Tias No. 8572.

13 Econ Inc., Final Report, supra note 3.

14 Id. at 48.

15 For a review of early theories, see S. GOROVE, supra note 3, at 14 fj.

16 .Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and other Celestial Bodies [hereinafter referred to as Outer Space Treaty], signed Jan. 27, 1967, entered into force Oct. 19, 1967, 18 UST 2410, TIAS No. 6347, 610 UNTS 2.

17 McDougal, The Emerging Customary Law of Space, 58 Nw. U.L. REV. 618 (1964). See also S. H. LAY & H. J. Taubenfeld, The Law Relating to Activities Of Man In Space 48-49 (1970) and the citations therein.

18 For a discussion of these claims, see infra section III.

19 See, e.g., Goedhuis, The Changing Legal Regime of Air and Outer Space, 27 INT'L L.Q. 576, 590 (1978): ”… there is, on the basis of the attitude of the overwhelming majority of States, a consensus that to allow individual States to exercise sovereignty at the lowest height at which satellites are put in orbit, would, to an unacceptable extent, invalidate the principle of freedom and non-appropriation of outer space.“

20 Gorbiel, supra note 1, at 177.

21 Art. 1, para. 2.

22 Id., Art. 1, para. 1.

23 Gorove, Freedom of Exploration and Use in the Outer Space Treaty, 1 DENVER J. INT'L L. & POL. 93, 104 (1971).

24 Id. at 101-04.

25 ECON, INC., Final Report, supra note 3, at 48.

26 In the course of UN discussions, the Colombian delegate noted that with the progress of technology it was possible to extend the life of geostationary satellites and, in view of this, he expressed the fear that the geostationary orbit would be subject to appropriation. UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.296 at 4 (1978).

27 Cocca, Towards an Adequate Legal Regulation of the Geostationary Orbit, supra note 1, at 194.

28 Ibid.

29 Gorove, Interpreting Article II of the Outer Space Treaty, 37 Fordham L. Rev. 349, 352 (1969). A recently concluded study argues that 30 years would not amount to “permanence” for purposes of appropriation. This, however, is somewhat doubtful. See Econ Inc., Final Report, supra note 3, at 57.

30 For a discussion, see infra section III, at p. 450.

31 See comment by Professor Goedhuis in the Report Of the 54th conference Of The International Law Association 427 (1971).

32 As has been noted by this writer earlier, throughout the negotiations involving the Draft Treaty Relating to the Moon, the United States has taken the position that an express or implied moratorium on the exploitation of natural resources of the moon until an international regime can be established to regulate exploitation is unacceptable. However, many developing nations have been in favor of such a moratorium. What is revealing with respect to the diametrically opposed views is the fact that apparently neither of the two positions regards Article II of the Outer Space Treaty as a ban on exploitation of moon resources. If either of them did, the argument about placing a moratorium on exploitation would become largely meaningless. See S. Gohove, supra note 3, at 217, 219; UN Doc. PUOS/C.2 (XV)/WG.l/Working Paper 3; Press Release U.S.-U.N. 37 (73).

33 Gorbiel, supra note 1, at 172.

34 UN Doc. A/C.1/PV.10 at 37-38, 81-82.

35 Brazil was represented by an observer.

36 For an English translation of the declaration, see ITU, Broadcasting Satellite Conference, Doc. No. 81-E, Annex 4 (Jan. 17, 1977); see also 6 J. SPACE L. 193 (1978).

37 Bogotá Declaration, section 1.

38 Id., section 3(d).

39 Id., section 3(e).

40 Id., section 3(c).

41 Id., section 3(b).

42 Id., section 1.

43 Id., section 4.

44 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/7/Add.l (1978).

45 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.296, April 4, 1978, at 3.

46 UN Press Release OS/222, April 3, 1978, at 2.

47 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.296, supra note 45, at 4.

48 Ibid

49 lbid.

50 Ibid.

51 UN Press Release OS/852, April 5, 1978, at 2.

52 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.298, April 6, 1978, at 5-6.

53 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 2.

54 ibid.

55 Id. at 3.

56 UN Press Release OS/224, April 5, 1978, at 3.

57 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 3.

58 UN Press Release OS/223, April 4, 1978, at 5.

59 Id. at 4.

60 Id. at 3.

61 Id. at 2.

62 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 2.

63 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.298, supra note 52, at 5-6.

64 ibid.

65 Ibid.

66 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 3.

67 Ibid.

68 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.298, supra note 52, at 5-6.

69 Ibid.

70 UN Press Release OS/224, supra note 56, at 3.

71 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.298, supra note 52, at 5-6.

72 Section 1.

73 Section 1.

74 Section 3(a).

75 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.296, supra note 45, at 2.

76 UN Press Release OS/222, supra note 46, at 2.

77 Ibid.

78 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 1.

79 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.296, supra note 45, at 5.

80 Ibid.

81 Ibid.

82 Ibid.

83 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.298, supra note 52, at 6.

84 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 2.

85 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.298, supra note 52, at 5-6.

86 UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.290, March 23, 1978, at 5.

87 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 3.

88 Ibid

89 Ibid.

90 UN Press Release OS/223, supra note 58, at 5.

91 UN Press Release OS/844, March 17, 1978, at 3.

92 UN Press Release OS/223, supra note 58, at 4.

93 UN Press Release OS/852, supra note 51, at 3.

94 Existence of the principle, which is reflected in state practice, has been acknowledged by the delegate of Colombia. UN Doc. A/AC.105/C.2/SR.296, supra note 45, at 4.

95 Final Acts of the World Administrative Radio Conference for Space Telecommunications, Res. Spa. 2-1 (Geneva, 1971).

96 Ibid.

97 Id., Res. Spa. 2-2.

98 From among the sigNato ries of the Bogota Declaration as of January 1, 1978, only Brazil was listed to be a party to the Partial Revision of the Radio Regulations of July 17, 1971. See U.S. Dept of State Pub. No. 8934, Treaties in Force on January 1, 1978, at 371 (1978).

99 Partial Revision of the Radio Regulations, Art. 9A.

100 As of January 1, 1978, from among the sigNato ries of the Bogota Declaration, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, and Zaire were listed as parties to the International Telecommunication Convention of 1973. See Treaties In Force, supra note 98, at 368.

101 International Telecommunication Convention of 1973, supra note 12, Art. 33.

102 Art. 35.

103 Id., Art. 10(3).

104 Final Acts of the World Administrative Radio Conference for the Planning of the Broadcasting-Satellite Service in Frequency Bands 11.7-12.2 GHz (in Regions 2 and 3) and 11.7-12.5 GHz (in Region 1), Res. No. Sat-7 (Geneva, 1977).

105 ibid.

106 U.S. deft, of state, report of the u.s. delegation To The Warc-Bs (40 TD. Ser. No. 80, 1977).

107 WARC Final Acts, supra note 104, Final Protocol No. 51.

108 Id., No. 2.

109 Id., No. 74.

110 Sarkar, supra note 1, at 450.

111 UN Dep't of Political and Security Council Affairs, Space Activities and Resources, UN Doc. A/C.105/193, at 54 and 58 (1977).

112 For a recent assessment of some of the unresolved issues of the Law of the Sea Conference, see Oxman, The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: The Seventh Session (1978), 73 AJIL 1 (1979).

113 S. GOROVE supra note 3, at 167 ff.

114 UN Doc. A/RES/2467A (XXIII) 1968.

115 UN Doc. A/RES/3281 (XXIX) 1974.

116 UN Doc. A/RES/2692 (XXV) 1970.

117 See, e.g., the Bogota Declaration.

118 Outer Space Treaty, Art. I.

119 Id., Art. V.

120 Id., Art. I.