Comments on Space Law
| Date | 01 April 1961 |
| Author | Michael Aaronson |
| DOI | 10.1177/004711786100200302 |
| Published date | 01 April 1961 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
135
COMMENTS
ON
SPACE
LAW
MICHAEL
AARONSON
~N
OCTOBER
1960,
Professor
John
Cobb
Cooper,
an
acknow-
ledged
United
States
authority
on
Air
Law,
presented
a
lecture
at
Leiden
University
entitled &dquo;
Fundamental
Questions
of
Outer
Space
Law.&dquo;
This
lecture
has
been
printed
elsewhere
and
conforms
almost
entirely
with
the
contents
of
papers
which
Professor
Cooper
has
published
over
the
past
twelve
months.
They
appear
to
sum-
marize
his
testimony
before
the
U.S.
House
of
Representatives
Select
Committee
on
Astronautics
and
Space
Exploration
in
April
1958.
It
may
be
presumed,
therefore,
that
Professor
Cooper,
who
for
some
years
has
been
evolving
his
theories
on
Space
law,
con-
centrating
to
a
large
extent
on
the
altitude
of
territorial
sovereignty,
has
now
formulated
his
definitive
standpoint.
Professor
Cooper
expounded
on
the
following
four
questions.
1.
What
is
meant
by
the
term
Outer
Space?
2.
What
is
or
should
be
the
legal
status
of
Outer
Space?
3.
What
are
the
independent
rights
of
sovereign
States
in
Outer
Space?
4.
What
is
the
legal
status
of
satellites
and
future
spacecraft?
It
is
proposed
to
comment
on
these
four
questions
in
the
same
order
as
presented
in
Professor
Cooper’s
lecture.
What
is
meant
by
the
term
Outer
Space ?
Professor
Cooper
states
that
the
United
Nations,
Heads
of
State,
diplomats
and
jurists
continue
to
use
the
term &dquo;
Outer
Space &dquo;
as
meaning
a
geographic
area
but
as
yet
without
any
agreed
defini-
tion.
He
vigorously
opposes
the
view
expressed
by
the
original
United
Nations
Ad
Hoc
Committee
on
the
Peaceful
Uses
of
Outer
Space
that
the
question
of
determining
where
air-space
ends
and
Outer
Space
begins
is
not
a
question
requiring
priority
of
treatment.
He
does
not
believe
that the
Rule
of
Law
can
be
established
with
certainty
as
to
Outer
Space,
which
he
describes &dquo;
as
a
finite
geo-
graphic
area &dquo;,
unless
the
boundaries
of
that
area
are
known
and
understood.
At
that
point
he
indicates
that
he has
long
been
in
agreement
with
the
view
expressed
by
the
same
United
Nations
report
that
the
upper
boundary
of
the
airspace
and
the
lower
boundary
of
Outer
Space
do
not
necessarily
coincide.
It
is
conceded
from
the
outset
that
Professor
Cooper
is
quite
correct
in
drawing
attention
to
the
loose
use
of
the
term
Outer
Space.
Yet,
one
wonders
whether
the
matter
is
assisted
further
by
the
description
of
this
region
as
a
&dquo;
finite
geographic
area.&dquo;
The
clue,
however,
appears
to
be
given
in
the
definition
which
Professor
Cooper
proposes
should
be
included
in
an
international
convention
which
reads.
&dquo;
Outer
Space,
for
the
purposes
of
this
convention
is
defined
as
the
area
whose
lower
or
inner
boundary
is
the
lowest
altitude
To continue reading
Request your trial