Proceedings of the Workshop - United Nations Office for Outer ...

70 EXPANDING GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICESApart from that, a clear analogy is possible between thedeveloping law of space, and the law of the sea. Theregistration of shipping and flags of convenience stateshave been long-standing problems.There is, of course, a correlative possibility that inreality a state may seek to register frequencies and/ororbital positions in order to gain revenue by leasingthem to companies. (The Tongasat question could beviewed in this light.) In such a case a state wouldeffectively be homesteading a claim which might ormight not eventually produce gold. This would be anundesirable abuse of the ITU system. It is true that thenew measures as to ‘due diligence' described below inthe discussion of ‘Paper Satellites’ will do much toreduce the problem. But that does assume a state willact in accordance with the spirit of the system. A statejust might be persuaded to play the system, interpretingthe words of the procedures to suit its own purposesand those of a persuasive company. My answer to thiswould be to encourage the ITU to use the powers thatcan be implied from its purposes, as indicated in the lastsection of this paper. But perhaps the ITU wouldprefer express authority so to do.Therefore, to cope with the problems of this subheading,perhaps UNISPACE III should declare that itis incumbent on states not to incorporate or registercompanies, or license the activities of companiesengaged in space telecommunications, unless there is aclear and substantial connection between the state andthe business to be carried on. Further states shouldnotify only space systems which are required for theirown internal and international telecommunicationsservices, traffic volume being an importantconsideration. The ITU, should be given the power toscrutinise notifications to it for the required connectionsbetween operator and the notifying state, and betweenthe proposal and the telecommunications requirementsof that state, and be instructed to refuse notificationswhich do not meet these test. Such could go along withother proposals for strengthening the role of the ITUwhich are made below.LicensingFinally in connection with new entrants there is thequestion of the licensing authority. At present it is forstates to license an entity which wishes to engage inspace activities, including telecommunications (Art. VI,OST). In so doing a state is free to establish whatevermechanisms it may choose. However, for the sake ofthis discussion let us assume that every state deals withthe matter through a Communications Commission. Nomatter what device is used, such a Commission willhave regard to the interests of the state in coming to adecision. In many countries by reason of their rules asto the incorporation of international law, the obligationsthe state has under the ITU and other appropriate forawill be taken into account. At least, one hopes so.Other countries act differently. But in any event, it isclear that the domestic interest of the state, oftenmanifested through the benefit to the national entitywhich is the applicant for the licence, is paramount.The result is that the global telecommunications systemdevelops piecemeal, as a cumulation of separatecommercial and state interests. There is no body orprocess in which the interest of the world as a whole isthe basis of licensing decisions in spacetelecommunications.Consider the new entrant using one of the LowEarth Orbit technologies. The licences granted for suchmean that the company gets access to orbits and tofrequencies. Theoretically the licence is valid onlywithin the jurisdiction of the authority which grants it.In some cases new rules as to the recognition oflicences, for example within the European Union,means that a wider area is covered - but it is still asmall area having regard to the fact that the LEOsatellite(s) orbit the earth. In effect therefore thedecision of one licensing authority pre-empts the matteron a global basis, but the decision has been made in theparticular interest of the licensing state. This is wrong.I would argue (and will argue again further on,though expressing certain reservations) that just asspace telecommunications affects the whole world, notjust the state of licence, decisions affecting the worldshould be made by a world authority. A globalCommunications Commission is the only way in whichthe aspirations of Article I of the Outer Space Treaty