Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Regulation of Space Activities in The Netherlands

From Hugo Grotius to the High Ground of Outer Space

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
National Regulation of Space Activities

Part of the book series: Space Regulations Library Series ((SPRL,volume 5))

Abstract

The Netherlands, being aware of its relative size when compared to the major spacefaring nations not only globally but also in the European context, has always addressed outer space and space activities from the perspective of the role it could feasibly play.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The European Space Agency was established in 1975 by means of the Convention for the Establishment of a European Space Agency (hereafter ESA Convention), Paris, done 30 May 1975, entered into force 30 October 1980; 14 ILM 864 (1975).

  2. 2.

    Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (hereafter Outer Space Treaty), done 27 January 1967, entered into force 10 October 1967; 610 UNTS 205; TIAS 6347; 18 UST 2410; UKTS 1968 No. 10; Cmnd. 3198; ATS 1967 No. 24; 6 ILM 386 (1967).

  3. 3.

    See Nederlandse Staatswetten, Editie Schuurman & Jordens, 104a (1981), at 3.

  4. 4.

    Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space, London/Moscow/Washington, done 22 April 1968, entered into force 3 December 1968; 672 UNTS 119; TIAS 6599; 19 UST 7570; UKTS 1969 No. 56; Cmnd. 3786; ATS 1986 No. 8; 7 ILM 151 (1968).

  5. 5.

    See supra note 3, 104a (1981), at 12.

  6. 6.

    Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (hereafter Liability Convention), London/Moscow/Washington, done 29 March 1972, entered into force 1 September 1972; 961 UNTS 187; TIAS 7762; 24 UST 2389; UKTS 1974 No. 16; Cmnd. 5068; ATS 1975 No. 5; 10 ILM 965 (1971). See supra note 3, 104a (1981), at 18.

  7. 7.

    Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (hereafter Registration Convention), New York, done 14 January 1975, entered into force 15 September 1976; 1023 UNTS 15; TIAS 8480; 28 UST 695; UKTS 1978 No. 70; Cmnd. 6256; ATS 1986 No. 5; 14 ILM 43 (1975). See supra note 3, 104a (1981), at 29.

  8. 8.

    Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, New York, done 18 December 1979, entered into force 11 July 1984; 1363 UNTS 3; ATS 1986 No. 14; 18 ILM 1434 (1979).

  9. 9.

    This is essentially the case for the liability regime, where also failed launches could lead to application of that regime; cf. esp. Article I(b), Liability Convention. Most rules, rights and obligations contained in the corpus juris spatialis internationalis even start to become relevant, de jure or de facto, only once a space object has actually entered the realm of outer space – wherever that may begin.

  10. 10.

    These concepts and terms are the ones used by Article VI, Outer Space Treaty, to indicate international responsibility for space activities for certain states exists, which would almost automatically suggest a need for such states to control those activities if not undertaken by the states themselves.

  11. 11.

    This is the consequence of the space liability regime offered by Article VII, Outer Space Treaty, and the various clauses of the Liability Convention.

  12. 12.

    Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water, Moscow, done 5 August 1963, entered into force 10 October 1963; 480 UNTS 43; TIAS 5433; 14 UST 1313; UKTS 1964 No. 3; ATS 1963 No. 26.

  13. 13.

    Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, New York, done 24 September 1996, not yet entered into force.

  14. 14.

    INTELSAT was originally established by means of the Agreement Relating to the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT), Washington, done 20 August 1971, entered into force 12 February 1973; 1220 UNTS 21; TIAS 7532; 23 UST 3813; UKTS 1973 No. 80; Cmnd. 4799; ATS 1973 No. 6; 10 ILM 909 (1971), and the corresponding Operating Agreement Relating to the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT), Washington, done 20 August 1971, entered into force 12 February 1973; 1220 UNTS 149; TIAS 7532; 23 UST 4091; UKTS 1973 No. 80; Cmnd. 4799; ATS 1973 No. 6; 10 ILM 946 (1971).

  15. 15.

    INMARSAT was originally established by means of the Convention on the International Maritime Satellite Organization (INMARSAT), London, done 3 September 1976, entered into force 16 July 1979; 1143 UNTS 105; TIAS 9605; 31 UST 1; UKTS 1979 No. 94; Cmnd. 6822; ATS 1979 No. 10; 15 ILM 1052 (1976), and the corresponding Operating Agreement on the International Maritime Satellite Organization (INMARSAT), London, done 3 September 1976, entered into force 16 July 1979; 1143 UNTS 213; TIAS 9605; 31 UST 1; UKTS 1979 No. 94; Cmnd. 6822; ATS 1979 No. 10; 15 ILM 233, 1075 (1976).

  16. 16.

    EUTELSAT was originally established by means of the Convention Establishing the European Telecommunications Satellite Organization (EUTELSAT), Paris, done 15 July 1982, entered into force 1 September 1985; Cmnd. 9069; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, C.II.1, and the corresponding Operating Agreement Relating to the European Telecommunications Satellite Organization (EUTELSAT), Paris, done 15 July 1982, entered into force 1 September 1985; Cmnd. 9154; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, C.II.2.

  17. 17.

    Convention for the Establishment of a European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT), Geneva, done 24 May 1983, entered into force 19 June 1986; as amended 14 July 1994, entered into force 27 July 1994; Cmnd. 9483; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, C.III.1; 44 ZLW 68 (1995).

  18. 18.

    Cf. Artt. V(1.b), XIII(2), ESA Convention.

  19. 19.

    Hence, the Netherlands is one of the eleven ESA member states parties to the Agreement among the Government of Canada, Governments of Member States of the European Space Agency, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian Federation, and the Government of the United States of America concerning Cooperation on the Civil International Space Station, Washington, done 29 January 1998, entered into force 27 March 2001; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, D.II.4.

  20. 20.

    Act on launching objects from Norwegian territory into outer space, No. 38, 13 June 1969; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 286.

  21. 21.

    Act on Space Activities, 1982: 963, 18 November 1982; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 398; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.II.1; 36 Zeitschrift für Luft- und Weltraumrecht (1987), at 11; and Decree on Space Activities, 1982: 1069; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 399; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.II.2; 36 Zeitschrift für Luft- und Weltraumrecht (1987), at 11.

  22. 22.

    Outer Space Act, 18 July 1986, Chapter 38; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 293; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.I; 36 Zeitschrift für Luft- und Weltraumrecht (1987), at 12.

  23. 23.

    This concerned the Land Remote Sensing Commercialization Act, Public Law 98-365, 98th Congress, H.R. 5155, 17 July 1984; 98 Stat. 451; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.III.4; shortly followed by the Commercial Space Launch Act, Public Law 98–575, 98th Congress, H.R. 3942, 30 October 1984; 98 Stat. 3055; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.III.3.

  24. 24.

    Law of the Russian Federation on Space Activities, No. 5663-1, 20 August 1993, effective 6 October 1993; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 101.

  25. 25.

    Law of the Ukraine on Space Activities, No. 502/96-VR, 15 November 1996: National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 36.

  26. 26.

    Single European Act, Luxembourg/The Hague, done 17/28 February 1986, entered into force 1 July 1987; 25 ILM 506 (1986); OJ L 169/1 (1987).

  27. 27.

    Towards a Dynamic European Economy – Green Paper on the Development of the Common Market for Telecommunications Services and Equipment, Communication from the Commission, COM(87) 290 final, of 30 June 1987; OJ C 257/1(1987).

  28. 28.

    Towards Europe-wide systems and services – Green Paper on a common approach in the field of satellite communications in the European Community, Communication from the Commission, COM (90) 490 final, of 20 November 1990.

  29. 29.

    Commission Directive amending Directive 88/301/EEC and Directive 90/388/EEC in particular with regard to satellite communications, 94/46/EC, of 13 October 1994; OJ L 268/15 (1994).

  30. 30.

    Examples concerned the Commission Directive amending Directive 90/387/EEC with regard to personal and mobile communications, 96/2/EC, of 16 January 1996; OJ L 20/59 (1996); the Commission Directive amending Directive 90/388/EEC with regard to the implementation of full competition in telecommunications markets, 96/19/EC, of 13 March 1996; OJ L 74/13 (1996); and the Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a coordinated authorization approach in the field of satellite personal communications systems in the Community, No. 710/97/EC, of 24 March 1997; OJ L 105/4 (1997).

  31. 31.

    The WTO was created under the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Marrakesh, done 15 April 1994, entered into force 1 January 1995; 1867 UNTS; UKTS 1996 No. 57; ATS 1995 No. 8; 33 ILM 1125, 1144 (1994).

  32. 32.

    General Agreement on Trade in Services, Marrakesh, done 15 April 1994, entered into force 1 January 1995; ATS 1995 No. 8.

  33. 33.

    Agreement on Basic Telecommunications Services, Geneva, done 15 February 1997, entered into force 5 February 1998; ATS 1998 No. 9; 36 ILM 354 (1997).

  34. 34.

    Cf. e.g. the famous dictum of the International Court of Justice in the Barcelona Traction Case; Case Concerning the Barcelona Traction Light and Power Company, Limited (Second Phase)(Belgium v. Spain), International Court of Justice, 5 February 1970, I.C.J. Rep. 1970, 4, at 42, § 70.

  35. 35.

    Cf. Article III of the Outer Space Treaty.

  36. 36.

    Cf. Articles I(c) and V of the Liability Convention.

  37. 37.

    Article I(c), sub (i) of the Liability Convention.

  38. 38.

    It should be kept in mind that the Liability Convention just refers to “a state which (…) procures” (Article I(c) (i); emphasis added), not to “a state which procures or whose private entities procure”; references to private enterprise should not be simply read into a case where explicitly only reference is made to “states”. With reference furthermore to the manner in which individual states have implemented this clause, as it turns out most states have actually refrained from requiring a license merely for the procurement by a private company of a launch, which means that those states apparently consider private procurement not to be included, so that it is not necessary to domestically cover themselves against presumed international consequences under the Liability Convention. As a matter of fact, the UK Outer Space Act is the only domestic space law that explicitly requires a license for the mere activity of procuring a launch (as per Section 1(a)). While most authors, as indicated, hold an opposite view, an unequivocal interpretation of the Liability Convention’s text by states is clearly absent.

  39. 39.

    Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty.

  40. 40.

    It should be kept in mind that the Liability Convention does not take any other state into consideration for apportionment of liability but the state(s) involved in the launch as “launching states”, and neither Liability Convention nor Registration Convention have allowed for qualification as launching / liable state after the launch, e.g. by in-orbit take-over. Even more crucially, the Registration Convention does not even formally allow for re-registration.

  41. 41.

    It may be noted, that Article XXII(1), Liability Convention, specifically required a majority of INTELSAT member states (some 140 at the time) to be parties to the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention itself, which is a quite stringent condition – even as of 1 January 2006, the Outer Space Treaty had 98 states parties, the Liability Convention 83. See the website of the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs, at http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/SpaceLaw/treaties.html.

  42. 42.

    See 80 Staatsblad (2007), at 1.

  43. 43.

    See 492 Staatsblad (2007).

  44. 44.

    The Dutch version thereof can be found in Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, Vergaderjaar 2005-2006, 30 609, nr. 3. As with the Space Activities Act itself, the English translation used for the purposes of this article, which is on file with the author, was an unofficial one; it was made official however later in the course of 2007.

  45. 45.

    See Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, Vergaderjaar 2004–2005, 24 446, nr. 27.

  46. 46.

    Section 1(b), Space Activities Act. It may be noted, that the term “space activities” as such is not to be found in the space treaties, only closely related ones appear; Article I, Outer Space Treaty, for example refers to “the exploration and use of outer space”, whilst Article VI, Outer Space Treaty refers to “activities in outer space”.

  47. 47.

    Section 1(c), Space Activities Act. This definition is of interest inter alia with a view to Article I (d), Liability Convention, and Article I(b), Registration Convention, which only offer a rudimentary definition of the term “space object”.

  48. 48.

    As a consequence of this particular structure of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the instrument of a “Kingdom Act” is available to ensure that certain laws apply to the comprehensive Kingdom of the Netherlands, that is including the overseas territories. Whilst the space treaties have been implemented by means of such Kingdom Acts, it was decided not to use this instrument in case of the Space Activities Act. Furthermore, it should be noted that currently major constitutional changes in the status of the Dutch Antilles are taking place.

  49. 49.

    In other words: also the Netherlands in principle does not consider “procurement” by a private party to require a license for Liability Convention-purposes; although a possible exception might be made in the future for space tourism.

  50. 50.

    The terms “Dutch ship” and “Dutch aircraft” are defined by Section 1(d) and (e) respectively, in both cases with reference to Dutch law. Space activities conducted “from a Dutch space object” are not considered feasible for the time being, hence do not require inclusion in this clause at this point. In addition, it should be noted that formally space objects do not acquire a “nationality”, but merely a “state of registration” by virtue of Article VIII, Outer Space Treaty, and Article II, Registration Convention. This is different for ships and aircraft; see resp. Article 5(1), Convention on the High Seas, Geneva, done 29 April 1958, entered into force 30 September 1962; 450 UNTS 82; TIAS 5200; 13 UST 2312; UKTS 1963 No. 5; Cmnd. 584; ATS 1963 No. 12; and Article 91(1), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, done 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994; 1833 UNTS 3 & 1835 UNTS 261; UKTS 1999 No. 81; Cmnd. 8941; ATS 1994 No. 31; 21 ILM 1261 (1982) for ships; and Article 17, Convention on International Civil Aviation, Chicago, done 7 December 1944, entered into force 4 April 1947; 15 UNTS 296; TIAS 1591; Cmd. 6614; UKTS 1953 No. 8; ATS 1957 No. 5; ICAO Doc. 7300 for aircraft. At the same time, in view of the resulting jurisdiction and the prohibition of double registration, for all practical purposes the registration of space objects should be deemed to lead to the same result as the granting of nationality thereto.

  51. 51.

    See Section 3(7), Space Activities Act, allowing imposition of further rules “in order to implement the provisions of Subsection 4”.

  52. 52.

    Section 6(1), Space Activities Act.

  53. 53.

    Section 6(2), Space Activities Act.

  54. 54.

    Section 4(3), Space Activities Act.

  55. 55.

    See Section 5, Space Activities Act.

  56. 56.

    Thus, the license will be revoked amongst others if that is necessary “to comply with a treaty or a binding decision of an international institution” (Section 7(1.b)), or if “the safety of persons and goods, environmental protection in outer space, the maintenance of public order or national security” (Section 7(1.c)) would be jeopardised. Similarly, the license may be revoked amongst others if the relevant rules have been infringed, if “the space activities have not been commenced within the stipulated time limit” (Section 7(2.b)), if “the purpose of the space activities for which the licence was issued has changed substantially” (Section 7(2.c)), or if “this is justified by a change in the technical or financial capabilities of the licence-holder” (Section 7(2.d)).

  57. 57.

    Section 8 of the Space Activities Act.

  58. 58.

    See Section 10(1) of the Space Activities Act.

  59. 59.

    See the discussion supra, on the de facto exclusion in particular of space tourist activities from the scope of the Act.

  60. 60.

    Cf. Sections 85, 86, ff., An act about space activities, and for related purposes, No. 123 of 1998, assented to 21 December 1998; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 197, as amended by Act No. 100 of 2002.

  61. 61.

    Section 10(2) of the Space Activities Act.

  62. 62.

    Cf. esp. Article II of the Registration Convention.

  63. 63.

    “Our Minister” is the standard legal phrase referring effectively to the government; the “our” referring in the form of a pluralis majestatis to the Queen of the Netherlands.

  64. 64.

    See Articles III and IV of the Registration Convention.

  65. 65.

    See Section 3(3) with the most fundamental requirements for the granting of a license, and Section 3(4) referring more specifically to the liability and insurance issues at stake.

  66. 66.

    Section 12(1) of the Space Activities Act.

  67. 67.

    Cf. Article XII of the Liability Convention, which specifies that “The compensation which the launching State shall be liable to pay for damage under this Convention shall be determined in accordance with international law and the principles of justice and equity, in order to provide such reparation in respect of the damage as will restore the person, natural or juridical, State or international organization on whose behalf the claim is presented to the condition which would have existed if the damage had not occurred.”

  68. 68.

    Section 12(2), (3) of the Space Activities Act.

  69. 69.

    Cf. for the United States, Section 16(a)(1)(A), Commercial Space Launch Act, Public Law 98-575, 98th Congress, H.R. 3942, 30 October 1984; 98 Stat. 3055; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.III.3, as amended by Commercial Space Launch Act Amendments, Public Law 100-657, 100th Congress, H.R. 4399, 15 November 1988; 49 U.S.C. App. 2615; 102 Stat. 3900; Space Law – Basic Legal Documents, E.III.3, 13 ff. and now codified as Section 70112(a.3), Commercial Space Transportation – Commercial Space Launch Activities, 49 U.S.C. 70101 (1994); and for Australia, Section 48(3), An act about space activities, and for related purposes, No. 123 of 1998, assented to 21 December 1998; National Space Legislation of the World, Vol. I (2001), at 197, as amended by Act No. 100 of 2002.

  70. 70.

    Section 12(4) of the Space Activities Act.

  71. 71.

    Section 17(1) resp. (2) of the Space Activities Act.

  72. 72.

    Section 15(1) of the Space Activities Act.

  73. 73.

    Section 15(2) of the Space Activities Act.

  74. 74.

    See Section 24(1) of the Space Activities Act. Reference is made here to Section 1(1) of the Economic Offences Act.

  75. 75.

    See Section 26 of the Space Activities Act.

  76. 76.

    Section 25(1) of the Space Activities Act.

  77. 77.

    This concerns the Law on Space Activities (Loi relative aux opérations spatiales); Loi No. 2008-518 du 3 juin 2008; 34 Journal of Space Law (2008), at 453; unofficial translation 34 Journal of Space Law (2008), at 453.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

    Frans von der Dunk

Authors
  1. Frans von der Dunk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frans von der Dunk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty Law, McGill University, Peel Street 3690, Montreal, H3A 1X1, Québec, Canada

    Ram S. Jakhu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

von der Dunk, F. (2010). Regulation of Space Activities in The Netherlands. In: Jakhu, R. (eds) National Regulation of Space Activities. Space Regulations Library Series, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9008-9_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation