Other areas beyond national jurisdiction (NB: don't need to know in detail)

Question 1

Why are the polar caps and outer space areas that relate to international environmental law?

Answer 1

In the past century we have seen growing amounts of human activity in these areas, so it needs to be regulated/monitored in some way

States need to come up with how environmental issues can be dealt with

Question 2

Is there sovereign claim to the Antarctic?

Answer 2

No. There are several states that claim so (NZ included), but none of these have been formalised

Question 3

What is the jist of the agreement in the Antarctic Treaty?

Answer 3

Sovereign claims are essentially frozen (set aside) so that respective states can cooperate and get shit done peacefully

Key concern: transparency and peaceful use of the continent

There is also an imperfect system of dealing with disasters, but it is in place

Question 4

What is the key difference between the Arctic and the Antarctic?
And what does this mean for jurisdiction?

Answer 4

One is land mass, other is frozen ocean

This means that as shipping becomes more prevalent in the area (as the cap melts/ icebreaker ship technology develops/ oil exploitation), it will likely fall under the Law of the High seas

NB: Canada and Russia claim ‘sector theory’ territory (idea of dividing the pie), but no one else gives a shit

Question 5

What environmental Principle has been attempted to apply to outer space?

Answer 5

The Principle of common heritage of mankind

Question 6

What does the Outer Space Treaty establish?

Answer 6

Establishes that no state can claim the moon or a comet or other celestial bodies and no weaponisation of outer space (no weapons on the moon etc.)

And this has been signed by 138 countries (inc. Russia and US), so it is fairly strong

Question 7

What does the Outer Space Treaty mention as far as the environment is concerned?
(2)

Answer 7

Very limited

1. There is provision for inter-state disputes, like when your satellite crashes into another
2. Don’t trash the moon with rubbish etc.

But no environmental talk beyond that

Question 8

Can states be held liable for accidents in/from outer space?

Answer 8

Yes, we have the 1972 Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects
-Absolute liability of launching state for damage on earth (however, the Cosmos 954 accident showed that Russia only got away with paying half the $6m clean up bill when their nuclear satellite came down in Canada)

NB: all states waive liability for anything that happens to the ISS

Question 9

What is the status of the moon and its resources?

Answer 9

1972 Moon Agreement

Attempts to apply the Principle of common heritage of mankind to the moon, but not an environmental attempt, more so that the resources on the moon don’t get taking by one country
-States to establish a legal regime for the exploitation of the moon and share the fruits equitably

But no space faring nation has signed this agreement so it hasn’t gone anywhere