The laws that govern Earth, whether it is those that regulate property, criminal commerce, or personal interactions are defined by the legislation body of sovereign states. Jurisdiction is how we identify which country’s law to be applied in what incident. Space law, like that of maritime and air law, is multifaceted in nature falling under the oversight of international law. The laws already established on Earth may not be available in space or may be incompatible with similar laws established by different nations. In retrospect, experts now believe with the rise of multinational space station activities comes a rise in the need to legislate space law.
The next few decades will witness the creation of a body of law, both internationally and domestically, for space that supplies the same function as maritime law does for the seas. Nonetheless, exports are divided on whether these laws should aim to prevent future problems or respond to immediate concerns. Advocates of responsive legislation preserve the notion that space law should be developed gradually. Reflecting the increased judicial interpretation, international political and legal pressures as well as the advances in technology, and the raised interest of the private sector in space. They argue that the laws stemmed from speculating about the future may needlessly limit technical and commercial opportunities.
On the other hand, advocates of preventive legislation argue that the current ambiguity on space law decreases the private sector’s interest in investing and lacks direction to courts that one day may be asked to settle space station cases. They believe that the current NASA regulation would not be sufficient in protecting the interest of space workers thus emphasizing the need to introduce legislation that would govern personal injury, product liability, intellectual property, and export policies.
