Insofar as the ban on national appropriation incorporated in Article II of the Outer Space Treaty is concerned, it would appear that the placing of a satellite in geostationary orbit would not constitute national appropriation. From the beginnings of the space age the principle 'first come, first served* was followed and the Outer Space Treaty did not place a limitation on this with respect to free space, and state practice to date appears to have confirmed it. As correctly observed by Professor Aldo Armando Cocca, Argentina's representative before the U.N. Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS): "though everybody has a right to place a space object in orbit, the second in time is to respect the 24 route chosen by the first." He called this rule similar to the 25 principle of "droit de route" in Argentine law. While the keeping of a GEOSAT in orbit for a period of 30 years may be argued to constitute national appropriation—since 30 years may satisfy the requirement that to constitute appropriation the act must be done with a "sense of permanence" 26 — in actuality it would not if geostationary orbit is regarded as a natural resource as characterized by the 1973 International Telecommunications Convention 27 and asserted by the equatorial countries. The reason is that there is authority to support the view that the ban does not relate to natural resources.28 This position also appears to have been shared by the Legal Subcommittee of UNCOPUOS, at least insofar as natural 29 resources of the moon and other celestial bodies were concerned.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==