Exploring the Unknown - NASA's History Office

116
THE HISTORY OF SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
the assembly should be the only competent parties to an arbitration proceeding. The
majority of the delegations wanted to include in the intergovernmental agreement some
mechanism for settling disputes among the governments[’] parties to that agreement.
With respect to the selection of the panel members, the Working Group’s report, which
was adopted by Committee II, stated that a majority favored selection of the panel by the
Assembly without weighted voting. This was inconsistent with the U.S. position that the
selection should be made by the board of governors. As for the scope of arbitrable disputes,
the U.S. position that the scope should be confined to legal disputes received
majority support, although some delegations favored a broader scope. The majority
favored limiting the scope to legal disputes but using a different formulation from that
proposed by the U.S.
Amendment Processes—The U.S. position that a proposed amendment to the operating
agreement be approved by the board of governors was opposed by several delegates.
Although there was general agreement that no amendment to the operating agreement
should be made [14] without the consent of the parties to the intergovernmental agreement,
differing views were expressed as to the manner in which that consent should be
manifested.
Liability of the Signatories—This matter was discussed only in the full Committee. A
significant issue was whether, if INTELSAT is given separate legal status, the signatories
would or should enjoy limited liability for INTELSAT obligations. There was significant
opinion that limited liability automatically followed from establishing INTELSAT with
legal personality. The U.S., along with Australia and Sweden, felt that it would not.
However, Sweden and a number of other delegations expressed the view that limited liability
is an advantage which should be afforded the signatories. A second issue was
whether exemption of the signatories to the operating agreement from inter se liability
should extend beyond consequential damages arising from a breakdown in service. There
was general agreement that the definitive arrangements should not impair member states’
responsibilities under the Treaty on Outer Space.
Withdrawal, Reservations, Definitions and Number of Agreements—Withdrawal was
discussed only briefly in Committee II. No general agreement was discernible.
The matters of reservations and definitions were deferred until the final text of the
agreement has been generally established. There appeared to be no opposition at this
time to the U.S. position prohibiting reservations.
An overwhelming majority supported the U.S. position for two agreements, with some
delegates reserving until more is known of the final text.
Committee III—Financial Arrangements
Committee III’s work program is shown in Annex E. Its report is Doc. 16.
[15] There was general agreement in the Committee that investment in the system should
be related to use, as the U.S. had proposed, though some countries, principally the Arab
group, favored applying the investment/use system only after allocating a base share of
investment to each member. There was near agreement on a minimum share for each
member, regardless of its use of the system, most delegations favoring 0.05%. However,
many delegations thought members with lower use should not be required to accept this
minimum.
The Committee divided three ways on the question of what types of use of the system
should be counted in determining investment shares, about one-third of those countries
that expressed views (including the U.S.) favoring all use of INTELSAT-financed facilities,
one-third favoring international traffic only, and another group proposing to count international
traffic and that domestic traffic that crosses international boundaries (or would
do so if projected on the surface of the earth). The ideas of several delegations on this
question clearly were related to the question of voting strength in the organization. It was