# The Legal Framework for Space Debris Remediation as a Tool for Sustainability in Outer Space
## 3 The Definition and Scope of Space Debris Remediation
### The Deficiencies of the Legal Framework Related to Space Debris Remediation (SDR)
The International Court of Justice, in the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project Case [63], observed that self-help in a state of necessity as a ground for precluding wrongfulness can only be accepted under strictly defined exceptional conditions. Such conditions could, in the context of global common interests in the protection and sustainability of outer space, be an imminent threat to the space environment in order to preserve its usability. Therefore, provided that the growth in the number of activities will most probably induce the occurrence of accidents in outer space, it is conceivable that the concept of a state of necessity might gain relevance in the future and play a role in establishing legal rules for SDR. * Also, the specific liability regime for space activities as established by Art. VII of the OST [26] and further elaborated in the 1972 Liability Convention [28] poses many questions for SDR operations. First, only states can be held liable for damages caused by space objects (Art. VII OST). Liability is, thereby, twofold: according to Art. II of the Liability Convention, for damages occurred in airspace or on the surface of the Earth, states have to pay compensation on the basis of \"absolute liability\". Therefore, no fault must be proven. The conditions that need to be given are a damage to property, life or health caused by a space object of a launching state to persons or states. (Art. I lit. (a) Liability Convention). Thus, attributability suffices, as long as it is known which the launching state is. For damages in outer space, liability is fault-based (Art. III Liability Convention). Therefore, besides attributability, the fault of the launching state--thus the non-observation of a certain legal duty of care--also needs to be proven. This means that if a private entity undertakes an ADR operation and damage is caused to the space object of a third party, the liability is attributed to the launching state(s) of the removed object and not to the third party conducting the operation, whereas in Art. I lit. (c) Liability Convention, a,launching State' is defined as the State which launches or procures the launching of a space object, or a State from whose territory or facility an object is launched. The costs incurred, thus, have to be carried by the launching state. However, for the regulation of SDR, it is questionable whether the standard for fault liability should be the same as for conducting a SDR operation. * Furthermore, no change or transfer of ownership of space objects is foreseen in the space law treaties. Art. VIII of the OST foresees that jurisdiction and control shall be retained by the state registry. None of the space law treaty provisions includes a regulation regarding a possible transfer of ownership and control over satellites. Thus, once a state has launched a space object, even if it has been thereafter sold to another entity or state, the original launching state remains liable for all potential damages caused by this space object. Any deviating clause must be concluded bilaterally between the launching state and the purchaser and it is only binding between these two parties. Thus, in the case of an accident that occurred during an ADR mission on a transferred satellite, the original launching state will be held liable for any potential damage, although it might have not had any control possibilities over the satellite. The launching state can then only hold recourse against the purchaser according to their bilateral agreement for the compensation paid to the damaged party. In practice, only a few transfers have taken place: e.g., of AsiaSat-1, APSTAR-I and APSTAR-IA from the United Kingdom to China in 1997, and of MARCOPOLO 1/BSB-1A from a British company to a Swedish national in 1999 [64]. Nevertheless, with the vast development of the commercial space market and the financial viability of satellite purchases triggered by the new space market, the legal issues related to change of ownership will gain more importance.