Laws Governing The Moon

Laws Governing the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies

"If the human species, or indeed any part of the biosphere, is to continue to survive, it must eventually leave the Earth and colonize space. For the simple fact of the matter is, the planet Earth is doomed... Let us follow many environmentalists and regard the Earth as Gaia, the mother of all life (which indeed she is). Gaia, like all mothers, is not immortal. She is going to die. But her line of descent might be immortal... Gaia's children might never die out--provided they move into space. The Earth should be regarded as the womb of life--but one cannot remain in the womb forever."

Tipler, Frank J., (1995) The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead London: Macmillan pp.xxvi+528

This passage by Tippler describes what could possibly be an inevitable chapter for the human race and its ability to survive on Earth. Overcrowding of the population and the overuse of natural resources will force the human species to ultimately leave the Earth and seek refuge in space, possibly even inhabiting the Moon. If this were to happen, laws would have to be developed and implemented to help with settlement into space. These laws are what lawyers call Space Laws.

The New York Law Journal Magazine describes space law and how it deals with human activities in outer space as laws that are a hodgepodge of bilateral agreements, national law, and certain "norms" of questionable weight. Most issues in space law come under the jurisdiction of the United Nations. Space law presents a great opportunity to the legal linguist because, since it is a relatively new field, the meanings of some of its key terms are still being worked out. Take "space," for example. Clearly, at some point up there, the earth ends and space begins. But where? Experts disagree. Is it where the earth's atmosphere peters out, somewhere around 80 km up? Or is it the lowest point where a craft can achieve orbit, about 100 km up?

Freedman, Adam, New York Law Journal Magazine; Vol. 2; Pg. 6, (2004) ALM Properties, Inc.

Defining the boundary of space has real implications for tort law. There is a completely different liability regime for accidents caused by aircraft versus those caused by spacecraft [which in space law go by the dreary name of space objects]. For the latter, there is the International Convention on Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects. (Freedman, 6)

Defining the boundary of space is one of the laws that would perhaps come to your mind first when you think of space law. But, what about when you pass these boundaries and you are definitely in space?

Excerpts from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ask; how would crimes be handled if they took place on a space station? What laws would govern a settlement on the moon or Mars? Can property rights apply to asteroids?

Weir, William, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (Wisconsin) February 8, 2004, Sunday Final Edition, Pg. 23A

Earthbound law is complicated enough; imagine what it's like when we venture farther out. Some people would even question whether we're right to apply human law to the heavens. Nonetheless, some forward-thinking lawyers are boldly going forth into this legal frontier.

(Weir, 23A)

Private property rights in space are currently one of the most pressing issues in space law, specialists say. Mars never will become America's 51st state, but what's to keep a corporation from settling it as a privatized colony? A 1979 Moon Treaty that would have prohibited any type of space ownership has been ratified by only a handful of nations, none of them major players in space exploration. (Weir, 23A)

I know when I think of property rights, I think of land that I have purchased and of the area that my house is built upon. I know in many land ownership contracts, you are only purchasing the land. Stipulations must be added to the contract to include mineral rights, water rights and even the airspace above the property that you have purchased. This same theory holds true for countries. Exactly how much of the airspace does each country control and how is domination or sovereignty identified?

Sovereignty is a big problem in space. A country remains sovereign over its adjacent airspace--but how far up does that airspace go? In the 1976 Bogota Declaration, a number of developing countries asserted that their national territory extends all the way up to geostationary orbit, or about 40,000 km straight up. This is the orbit where a satellite always stays over the same spot on earth. It is a particularly valuable bit of real estate because that's where communications satellites need to be. Imagine--if countries owned their orbital space, then they could very well charge you enormous fees for the privilege of having your communications satellite hovering over their territory. Those cell phone calls would suddenly become a lot more expensive. (Freedmen, 6)

Apparently, the Bogota Declaration was never accepted, because it was universally decried as a violation of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967.

The Outer Space Treaty, which has been ratified by 98 countries, including the United States, is often called the Magna Carta (any document or piece of legislation that serves as a guarantee of basic rights) of space law. It prohibits any state from claiming sovereignty over any part of outer space, including the moon and "other celestial bodies." (Freedman, 6)

This phrase has confounded space lawyers because it is not defined in any treaty or

convention. Under the Outer Space Treaty, most lawyers interpret celestial bodies to mean

all planets, natural satellites of planets and asteroids in the universe. Some scholars say the definition of celestial bodies ought to exclude any planet that is inhabited by intelligent beings. Assuming that there are intelligent aliens, the argument goes, it would be rude to foist the 1967 treaty on them. (Freedman, 6)

Do countries or people have the right to sell properties in space or on “other celestial bodies”? If people exploit these rights, are any laws in effect to prosecute them? Personally, I believe laws should be in place so that this cannot happen. The 1967 treaty (the Magna Carta of outer space) attempts to ratify these questions and provide the guidelines for the future use of outer space. Despite these guidelines and laws, people continue to look for the ambiguity of this treaty, thus presenting the prospect of exploiting these