The States then resolved: 1. that the registration with the ITU of frequency assignments for space radiocommunication services and their use should not provide any permanent priority for any individual country or groups of countries and should not create an obstacle to the establishment of space systems by other countries; 2. that, accordingly, a country or group of countries having registered with the ITU frequencies for their space radiocommunication services should take all practicable measures to realize the possibility of the use of new space systems by other countries or groups of countries so desiring. . . . This Resolution was designed to promote the "coordinated use of the special frequencies available for satellite systems." The foregoing Resolution has been construed to mean that registration of national assignments with the IFRB does not accord to the registrant a permanent priority concerning the registered frequencies. Thus, Rankin has concluded that "registration of a space services frequency assignment with the ITU does not provide the individual registrant with any permanent priority claim over that particular frequency, and that it is not to be viewed as a barrier to the establishment of space systems by other countries." Support for this viewpoint is also found in recommendations of the 1971 Conference. Thus, Recommendation No. Spa2-1 entitled "Relating to the Examination by World Administrative Radio Conferences of the Situation with Regard to Occupation of the Frequency Spectrum in Space 23 UST 1527, 1820-1, TIAS 7435. Clyde E. Rankin, III, "Utilization of the Geostationary Orbit--A Need for Orbital Allocation?" 13 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 107 (1974). Ibid., pp. 106-107.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==