BINDING ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES ARISING FROM SPACE ACCIDENTS

Öz

The desire to discover space’s unique environment, mine its resources, and changes in national regulations in favor of private enterprises have brought about significant technological advancement. This technological advancement has concomitantly helped humanity to exponentially increase its presence and activities in space. Alas, the law as to outer space has failed to precede this progress. The existing space legal regime is centered around States’ dominance in space and comprised of mechanisms purposed to resolve disputes between two or more States. Hence, it is bereft of effective procedures for the resolution of disputes among private actors, international organizations, and other non-governmental bodies with satellites and spacecrafts in outer space. In this respect, whilst outer space emerges as a new habitat where state and non-state actors are compelled to co-exist, how humanity will address unavoidable, extraterrestrial disputes between these actors becomes a pressing concern. Notably, the non-appropriable nature of space, the cornucopia of actors operating in it, and the abstruse nature of space-related disputes demand a resolution mechanism that may be readily adjusted to protect the interests of public or private enterprises. In light of this, this article assesses the viability of arbitration as an effective means of dispute settlement for accidents that occur in outer space. More specifically, this article analyzes the current international regulations as to outer space, the dispute resolution mechanisms enshrined in them, and how arbitration may play a key role in the effective and efficacious resolution of disputes in space accident cases.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• The Outer Space Treaty
• the Liability Convention
• Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
• Arbitration

Uzay Kazalarından Doğan Uyuşmazlıkların Zorunlu Tahkim Yoluyla Çözülmesi

Öz

Uzayın sıra dışı yapısını keşfetme ve minerallerinden faydalanma isteği, özel sektör lehine yapılan ulusal düzenlemeler ve teşvikler sonrası önemli teknolojik atılımlar elde edilmiştir. Bu atılımlar sayesinde insanoğlu uzaydaki varlığını ve etkinliğini de önemli ölçüde arttırmıştır. Ne yazık ki, uzay hukuku bu gelişmelerin gerisinde kalmıştır. Mevcut uluslararası düzenlemeler ve bu düzenlemelerin benimsediği uyuşmazlık çözüm metotları devlet merkezli bir anlayışla kaleme alınmış, uzayda faaliyet gösteren özel hukuk kişileri ve onların menfaatleri dikkate alınmamıştır. Bu durum özel sektörün uzaydaki varlığını önemli ölçüde arttırmasıyla birlikte daha da önem arz eden bir hale gelmiş, mağdurunun ve/veya failinin özel hukuk tüzel kişisi olduğu uzay kazalarının hangi uyuşmazlık çözüm metodu ile daha etkili ve etkin bir şekilde çözüme kavuşturulabileceği tartışılmaya başlanmıştır. Bu metodun tespitinde uzayın devletlerin egemenliğine tabi olmayan yapısı, uzayda faaliyet gösteren aktörlerin çeşitliliği ve uzay kazalarından doğacak uyuşmazlıkların karmaşık yapısı dikkate alınmalı, esnek ve somut olayın özelliklerine ve tarafların tercihlerine göre düzenlenebilecek ve uzayda faaliyet gösteren gerek kamu gerekse özel hukuk tüzel kişilerinin menfaatlerini koruyabilecek bir uyuşmazlık çözüm sistemi tercih edilmelidir. Bu bağlamda işbu makalede uzaya ilişkin uluslararası düzenlemeler, bu düzenlemelerce benimsenmiş uyuşmazlık çözüm metotları, bu metotların noksanlıkları incelenmiş olup, tahkimin neden bu metotların yerine tercih edilmesi gerektiği ve uzay kazalarından doğan uyuşmazlıkların etkili ve etkin çözümünde oynayabileceği rol analiz edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uzay Anlaşması
• Sorumluluk Sözleşmesi
• Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Mekanizmaları
• Tahkim

Kaynakça

1. Ben-Itzhak S, Companies are commercializing outer space. Do government programs still matter? The Washington Post (Washington, 11 January 2022)
2. Bennett CW, Houston, We Have an Arbitration: International Arbitration’s Role in Resolving Commercial Aerospace Disputes (2019) 19(1) Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 61
3. Browne O and Price R, A collision of two heads (2018)
4. Busby J, Dispute resolution in a vacuum? Arbitration’s role in resolving space disputes (Allen&Overy – News & Insights) (2022)
5. Burke A. Joseph, Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects: Definition and Determination of Damages After the Cosmos 954 Incident (1984) 8(2) Fordham International Law Journal 255
6. Dadwal V and Macdonald M, Arbitration of Space-Related Disputes: Case Trends and Analysis (2020)
7. Dadwal V and Tepper E, Arbitration in Space-related Disputes: A Survey of Industry Practices and Future Needs (2019)
8. Dennerley JA, State Liability for Space Object Collisions: The Proper Interpretation of ‘Fault’ for the Purposes of International Space Law (2018) 29(1) The European Journal of International Law 281

9. Hertzfeld HR and Nelson TG, Binding Arbitration as an Effective Means of Dispute Settlement for Accidents in Outer Space 2013 Proc. Int’l Inst. Space L. 129
10. Horton MJP, Consolidating Space: A Proposal to Establish a Central Forum for the Settlement of Space-Related Disputes (2020) 22(3) Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law 627
11. John DS, The Trouble with Westphalia in Space: The State-Centric Liability Regime (2012) 40(4) Denver Journal of International Law & Policy 686
12. Kehrer T, Closing the Liability Loophole: The Liability Convention and the Future of Conflict in Space (2019) 20(1) Chicago Journal of International Law 178
13. Khoukaz G, ADR That is Out of This World: A Regime for the Resolution of Outer-Space Disputes 2018(1) Journal of Dispute Resolution 265
14. Kilgore SC, Arbitration Rules for Disputes Arising from Space Activity (2018) Federal Lawyer 58
15. Koetsier J, Space Inc: 10,000 Companies, $4T Value…And 52% American Forbes (22 May 2021)
16. Lew JDM, Mistelis LA, and Kröll SM, Comparative International Commercial Arbitration (Kluwer Law International 2003)
17. Logterman S, Astronomical Arbitration: Why Amending the Liability Convention is the Best Step Forward for Interstellar Adjudication (2020) 30(1) Minnesota Journal of Int’l Law 183
18. Mills A, Rethinking Jurisdiction in International Law (2014) 84(1) British Yearbook of International Law 187
19. O’Callaghan J, SpaceX Declined to Move a Starlink Satellite at Risk of Collision with A European Satellite Forbes (2 September 2019)
20. O’Grady R, Star Wars: The Launch of Extranational Arbitration? (2016) 82(4) CIArb Arbitration Journal 3.
21. Pislevik S, Law Without Gravity: Arbitrating Space Disputes at the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the Relevance of Adverse Inferences (2019) 43(2) Journal of Space Law 280
22. Reinert AP, Updating the Liability Regime in Outer Space: Why Spacefaring Companies Should Be Internationally Liable for Their Space Objects (2020) 62(1) William & Mary Law Review 325
23. Rosenberg CB and Dadwal V, The 10 Year Anniversary of the PCA Outer Space Rules: A Failed Mission or The Next Generation? (Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 16 February 2021)
24. Sheetz M, the space industry is on its way to reach $1 trillion in revenue by 2040, Citi says CNBC (21 May 2022)
25. Skibba R, The US Space Force Wants to Clean Up Junk in Orbit Wired (17 November 2021)
26. Sloup GP, Peaceful Resolution of Outer Space Conflicts through the International Court of Justice: The Line of Least Resistance (1971) 20(3) DePaul Law Review 618
27. Sonne P, Ryan M, and Davenport C, In first, Russian test strikes satellite using Earth-based missile The Washington Post (16 November 2021)
28. Uluc I and Sutton KR, Esq., Without Silence, There is No Golden Rule; Without Dissent, There is No Progress (2018) 20 Oregon Review of International Law 219
29. Wall M, Space collision: Chinese satellite got whacked by hunk of Russian rocket in March Space.com (17 August 2021)
30. Xue H (ed), Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (Brill 2017)
31. International Documents
32. Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1968)
33. Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1984)
34. Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972)
35. Convention of Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1976)
36. Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters
37. Draft Articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities with Commentaries (2001)
38. European Parliament Legislative Resolution of 23 June 2022 on the Draft Council Decision Concerning the Accession of the European Union to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters
39. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967)
40. U.N. G.A. Res. 1962 (XVIII), the Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space
41. PCA, Radio Corporation of America v. the National Government of the Republic of China, Case No. 1934-01, Award of the Tribunal (13 April 1935)
42. Settlement of Claim Between Canada and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for Damage Caused by “Cosmos 954” (2 April 1981)