that they will seek the effective implementation of the agreements in order to serve their perceived interests. More specifically, answers have been provided for the three questions that were posed. First, under international law it is permissible for a State to place a space object, including a SPS, into geostationary orbit. International law imposes liability for collisions and malfunctionings while in orbit. Second, where direct harm, including physical and nonphysical or moral harm resulting from such direct harm, has been produced as a result of microwave transmissions, international law allows those harmed to recovery monetary compensation. The standard of compensation is set forth in Article 12 of the Liability Convention. The standard is a uniform one. This means that there cannot be divergent views as to the monetary value of harm resulting from different and competing legal systems. Recovery can be based on the malfunctioning of the space object, including its component parts. An injured person does not have to show intent to harm in order to recover. Such parts include transmitting equipment able to broadcast microwaves carrying the solar energy gathered at geostationary orbital level. Third, in the event that such radio transmissions were to constitute a harmful interference with other activities or experiments involving the peaceful uses of the space environment there is a duty to engage in diplomatic consultations with States asserting the possibility of harm. Scientific bodies exist that could assist in ascertaining the factuality of such claims of harmful interference. The duty to consult does not accord to the State seeking such consultation the right to veto the proposed use of or activity in the space environment. Jamming is not an allowable means to express disapproval of the potentially harmful
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==