“SPACE GOVERNANCE AT RISK: RETHINKING OWNERSHIP, LIABILITY AND STATE INTERVENTION IN THE FINAL FRONTIER”

AUTHOR – B. SRAVAN CHANDRA, STUDENT AT CHRIST (DEEMED TO BE) UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – B. SRAVAN CHANDRA, “SPACE GOVERNANCE AT RISK: RETHINKING OWNERSHIP, LIABILITY AND STATE INTERVENTION IN THE FINAL FRONTIER”, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPACE LAW AND POLICY (IJSLP), 3 (1) OF 2025, PG. 18-33, APIS – 3920 – 0014 & ISSN – 2584-1955. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJSLPV4I13

ABSTRACT:

The rapid growth of the private activity in outer space has pushed the existing legal framework into territory it was never designed to handle in the first place. Treaties like the Outer Space Treaty 1967 and the Liability Convention 1972 were drafted for a world dominated by State agencies, but today private companies lead in satellite deployment, mega-constellations, launch services, and even early-stage plans for resource extraction. As a result, long-standing principles on non-appropriation, State responsibility, and liability are being stretched in ways that create genuine uncertainty for regulators and operators also.

This paper uses doctrinal and comparative methods to examine how international space law interacts with emerging national regimes in the United States, Luxembourg, the UAE, Japan, the UK, Australia, India, China and Russia. This analysis shows that while some States have moved towards recognising private ownership of extracted resources, others remain cautious or resistant, producing a fragmented global landscape. This research also highlights that the traditional liability system built on diplomatic claims and State-to-State responsibility struggles in an era defined by private actors, dense orbital traffic and complex supply chains.

The study argues that these tensions have consequences not only for commercial certainty but also for the long-term sustainability and equity. To address these gaps, the paper proposes a new governance approach centred on clarifying resource rights, defining narrowly tailored operational deconfliction zones, establishing stronger baselines for liability and insurance, improving transparency through some shared SSA standards, and integrating the environmental and equity considerations into mission planning.

Overall, the paper suggests that meaningful reform does not require abandoning the OST framework, but building around it in such a way that balances innovation with public responsibility. Without such reforms, the future of outer space risks becoming increasingly unstable, environmentally vulnerable and shaped by the interests of a few technologically advanced States and also corporations.

Key words:  Outer space treaty, liability convention, sustainability, ownership and liability, Treaties, space mission, commercial activities