YANG Kuan ,Manzoor Hassan

1 School of Law,Beijing Institute of Technology (BIT),Beijing 100081

2 BIT Academy of Air and Space Policy and Law,Beijing 100081

Abstract: Space exploration and utilization have surged in recent years,with the increasing interest of private space farers,in space tourism and business.This surge in space activities leads to a mounted concern for space disputes between these actors,denoting devoir for an effective,efficient,adequate and swift dispute resolution framework.This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the existing legal framework for outer space dispute resolution,the need for an effective,efficient and swift dispute resolution framework.Further this paper proposes an artificial intelligence (AI) forum for an outer space dispute resolution legal framework under the umbrella of the UNCOPUOS.

Key words: outer space,artificial intelligence,space disputes resolution,UNCOPUOS

1 INTRODUCTION

Space exploration and utilization,once was a domain of a few nations but has now evolved as a common arena for everyone including the private sector. Consequently,this access to outer space come up with multifarious disputes,all-inclusive disputes regarding exploration and use of outer space resources,re-entry of debris,disarmament of space,the cyber space phenomenon,privacy of nations and more.

Resolving these disputes timely,equitably,effectively and efficiently is essential for sustainable space activities.Where existing international legal instruments such as,the UN Liability Convention,Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Optional Rules for Arbitration Dispute Relating to Outer Space Activities,International Law Association’s (ILA) Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Disputes,and a few others,provide a locus standi (the right or capacity to bring an action or appear in court) but due to limited scopes,complex procedures,challenges in enforcement,non-adoption of evolutionary technological advancement,these legal frameworks may hinder the effective resolution of such disputes.

In the last decade,artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transforming force with its speedy data analyzation,automated decision making ability,provides unprecedented room for effective,efficient,fair and speedy dispute resolution.This paper revolves around synergy between AI and dispute resolution mechanisms concerning space activities,discusses the impact of AI proposed to have in resolving outer space disputes.The paper further discusses the complexities of ethical and legal precautions to ensure compliance with international law principles and equitable dispute resolution guidelines.

2 EXISTING OUTER SPACE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS: PRACTICALITY AND LIMITATIONS

Existing dispute resolution mechanisms primarily include domestic means,diplomatic means,negotiations,and in few dispute arbitration or litigation,including the claims commission,PCA and the International Court of Justice (ICJ),which are somewhat contributing to the realm of dispute resolution in outer space,yet cannot effectively and efficiently reach effective dispute resolution.

Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations encourages for dispute resolution that states should firstly use “negotiation,enquiry,mediation,conciliation,arbitration,judicial settlement,resort to regional agencies or arrangements,or other peaceful means of their own choice”.Furthermore,it enshrines the applicability of UN Charter to outer space disputes.

2.1 Scrutinizing Domestic Legal Frameworks for Dispute Resolution in Outer Space

Domestic courts have somehow jurisdiction over disputes in outer space,as general international law argues multiple principles promoting this stance,such as the exclusive jurisdiction principle,nationality principle,passive personality principle,the protective jurisdiction principle,and universal jurisdiction principle.These international law principles expand the jurisdiction of domestic courts to entertain disputes of outer space.

In the race to space,Dubai has been proactive in making itself a global hub for space activities,supported by the recent establishment of “Dubai International Court of Space”.UAE enacted its first space law in December 2019,offering a framework for space operations within the nation.The law has procedures for resolving disputes,one of which is the creation of a committee to handle disputes pertaining to space operations.

In France,the French air and space law society has established the international space and aviation arbitration court,working under French law resolving outer space disputes exclusively between private disputants.The rules of the court state that the award be final and binding on the parties.The procedure provides a list of specialists in different fields to act as arbitrators for dispute in relevant fields.The cost for the tribunal is a lump sum for the number of days for the arbitration.Although the arbitration court seems to be a suitable forum for outer space dispute resolution,it has not adjudicated on any known cases as of today,which creates some doubts on its relevance and effectiveness.

Figure 1 United Nations mission for outer space with AI in dispute resolution under their flag

The UK government has also introduced the UK Space Industry Act that provides certain provisions for outer space dispute resolution.Similarly,national legislations and procedures like the procedures under the Australian Space Agency Act,provide resolution of outer space disputes under domestic courts.

Beside the potential of the national courts to entertain international disputes,the afore-mentioned national dispute resolution mechanisms have the drawback of lack of familiarity with the rules and applicability of the international legal frameworks,as well as the likely long and costly dispute resolution mechanisms.

2.2 International Dispute Resolution Mechanisms Providing Locus Standi for Space Farers

2.2.1 Outer space dispute resolution through ICJ

Outer space having no sovereignty,means disputes,if not diplomatically resolved can be entertained through the legal mechanisms of the ICJ.As an experienced international permanent dispute resolution body with juris consults,the court is able to establish a dedicated chamber for space disputes under Article 26 of the ICJ Statute,although this poses the limitation of restricted jurisdiction towards private bodies.

Private entities are left with the only option to opt for espousal with the government of their country for redress of their disputes,which is of less incentive to help provide locus standi.Even if espousal is what a state is agreed upon,the opposing party can refuse the compulsory jurisdiction of the court under Article 34 of the ICJ Statute,being a court of voluntary jurisdiction,and the dispute may be rendered un-adjudicated.Until now,there has been no case in the ICJ regarding disputes in outer space activities.

2.2.2 Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention as anchors of outer space dispute resolution

The Outer Space Treaty mentions consultations in its articles 9 to 12 rather than a complete mechanism for dispute resolution for outer space disputes.[1]However,the Liability Convention enshrining the principles of absolute liability and fault-based liability,lays down mechanisms for dispute resolution on occurrence of a dispute of outer space,after failing to resolve through diplomatic means.

These dispute resolution mechanisms being compatible solutions in the scheme of international space treaties,are not without drawbacks.For instance,in joint launching as defined by Article 5 of the Liability Convention,it will be inconclusive,where one of the states of the joint launching accepts the binding decision of the Claims Commission under the Convention and the other refuses to do so.[2]Private space actors can only bring claims if their state accepts to act on their behalf,which is of course they are not obliged to do so.The other issues are the lengthy procedures and the uncertainty of enforceability of an award,especially when the parties refuse to do so.Due to the reasons above,the Liability Convention has never been formally applied in dealing with disputes in outer space.

2.2.3 Contribution of the PCA to space dispute settlement

The PCA in 2011 adopted the Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Outer Space Activities,to enhance the efficiency in resolving outer space disputes.In addition,the PCA advisory group from time to time has drafted optional arbitration rules for further enhancing the procedural efficiency of the pre-existing optional rules.

The PCA optional rules striving significantly to achieve the establishment of a consolidated forum for outer space dispute resolution,even granting private parties a forum to protect their interest,but the jurisdiction of the same is still upon the consent of the disputant parties.Even-more,it is also upon the consenting parties,which law shall be applied for the resolution to their dispute.The procedure further prevents parties from publication of the PCA reasoning preventing establishment of a precedent for outer space disputes.

2.2.4 Dispute resolution mechanism of the European Space Agency

European Space Agency (ESA) is an inter-governmental agency dealing with interstate disputes.Article 25 of the Convention of the ESA provides a mechanism for the resolution of EU Contractual disputes through the EU Council of Ministers.If the dispute of the parties is not resolved through the EU council of Ministers,Article 17 provides that either of the disputants can bring their dispute to the ESA for arbitration,which is final and binding upon the parties.Where Article 17(2) provides for the disputant parties to choose the procedural rules for their dispute resolution.Even if the ESA arbitration mechanism could be a suitable and specialized forum for dispute settlement,it has an obvious disadvantage of limited scope,namely that the arbitration is only limited to its members,ESA and ESA contracts.

2.2.5 ILA Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Disputes

The commission of the United Nations was established by the UN General Assembly in 1947,with the objective to conduct studies and propose recommendations for the purpose of development and codification of international law,in accordance with Article 13 of the UN Charter.The ILA adopted the Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Disputes in 1984,which included the establishment of an International Tribunal for Space Law under its Article 37.The ILA Draft Convention allows both states and non-state actors to benefit under this Article,encouraging conciliation for dispute settlement,if the parties so agreed to conciliation.Article 21 of the ILA draft Convention bind disputant parties to the conciliation proceedings once initiated either until its termination or recommendation by the conciliators.The tribunal uses non-inclusive jurisdiction;parties can refer at the same time to the ICJ or to any other ad hoc arbitration.Further states may opt out certain provisions of the ILA Draft Convention or limit the scope of certain provisions to some activities of outer space which results in non-harmonization of the dispute resolution mechanism.[3]

2.2.6 Other outer space dispute resolution mechanisms

Some scholars have argued that adopting a multi-door courthouse as the most feasible alternative for settlement of disputes relating to outer space.For instance,the World Trade Organization dispute settlement mechanism,the International Chamber of Commerce Rules of Arbitration provide further alternatives for space faring nations to resolve their disputes.

Moreover,diplomatic means of negotiation are particularly used by states to solve their disputes,such as in the Iridium/Cosmos collision dispute between the United States and Russia which was resolved through diplomatic means.Parties in case of an outer space dispute can also refer to traditional means of dispute resolution like negotiation,mediation,conciliation,and enquiry,under public international law.These mechanisms are also declared valid by the Outer Space Treaty of 1967,which makes international law applicable to space activities.

In the last few years with the increase of online transactions and emergence of online businesses,a new phenomenon of online dispute resolution has also emerged.With a view that as the transactions and activities are online,the dispute settlement mechanisms must also be online.This emergence has made it easier for disputants,to avoid travel to courts or for arbitration,they neither need to spend much on the procedures nor time,so all these methods belong to an alternative dispute resolution method,where different forms of the same have been adopted.

2.3 Defects of Current Outer Space Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

Existing legal frameworks for space dispute resolution,including domestic,diplomatic and international legal frameworks contribute to the existing realm of space dispute resolution in one way or the other,but yet to reach the needs of space farers effectively and deal them efficiently.The existing dispute resolution frameworks pose multiple flaws,that challenges its effectiveness.At first glance these mechanisms are limited to domestic means,international institutions,the ICJ,forums like the ESA arbitration mechanism,but each of these mechanisms has distinct loopholes.

Domestic courts,while easily available and accessible to space farers,are not far from political influence,entail lengthy procedures,and being limited to national jurisdiction are sometimes inconsistent with international legal frameworks and more.

International frameworks,like the ICJ are limited by being based on the consent of space farer nations,where a considerable number of space faring nations,including the main space powers,like the United States and others do not subject themselves to the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ.Further Although it provides locus standi to space-faring nations,it does not leave the door open for national or international non-state actors.

Specialized national and international forums like the Claims Commission under the Liability Convention being established to resolve outer space disputes though,have certain loopholes impairing them to reach the standard of being an effective and efficient international legal forum for the same.In addition to other drawbacks,this forum also gives the disputants the option to choose to reject the award of the forum and vice versa.Further its jurisdiction does not always coincide with that of the modern-day space complexities and needs,specifically where joint ventures are concerned.Furthermore,this forum is limited to space-faring nations and it does not leave the door open for non-state actors.

The PCA mechanism,ESA mechanism,World Trade Organization (WTO) and other organizations,while these fora mostly cater to space-faring nations they do not effectively address the interest of space-faring non-state actors.Individuals and private sector space farers generally lack locus standi in these fora,and are limited to their states espousal.Further these fora pose flaws in their domain where they cannot effectively and efficiently cater for the pending issues of outer space dispute resolution,and hence cannot reach the needs of space farers.

In addition,the on-going evolution of online dispute resolution mechanisms for outer space has not yet achieved an effective and standard method of outer space dispute resolution.Even though online dispute resolution mechanisms provide easy accessibility and cost efficiency,they still have limited scope in outer space dispute resolution.The current mechanisms for outer space dispute resolution exhibit various flaws,including but not limited to political pressures,limitation of jurisdiction,challenges in enforcement of their decisions,non-applicability to non-state space farers.

3 ADVANTAGES AND POSSIBLE WAY OF APPLYING AI IN OUTER SPACE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

AI is no more a futuristic concept rather it has been adopted in many ways,as seen in the Kota Kinabalu Magistrate Court in Malaysia where it referred to the recommendations of an AI system in the judgement of sentencing two accused found guilty.[4]Similarly,in Colombia,a robot created by the government named Siarelis,provides help in corporate dispute resolution.[5]In Mexico,AI systems are also used to provide advice to human judges in pension cases.

John McCarthy was the first person who used the term“Artificial Intelligence” in 1956,defining it as “The Science and engineering of making intelligent machines[6]” in 2004.AI has many definitions,which vary from each academic perspective and the use of the same by such academic.Some academics have defined it from its working perspective,some have defined it from its natural perspective.Ni/SJ Nilsson defined it as “Activity devoted to making machines intelligent,and intelligence is that quality that enables an entity to function appropriately and with foresight in its environment.”[7]These definitions vary from time to time and from the academic perspective.

The application of AI in dispute resolution can be considered mainly in two ways.

1) Knowledge-based system (KBS)

These are AI programs which are designed to reason with knowledge to resolve a dispute.

These can be further divided into two categories: rulesbased systems consisting of a set of IF-THEN codes and casebased reasoning systems which bases the decision on precedents rather than preset rules.

2) Machine learning

This is a kind of AI system which has the ability to work without some explicit programming,and can perform as a human.It can be divided into supervised learning,which is an approach used through labeled data sets,training and supervising algorithm in classifying data and predicting outcomes;and unsupervised learning,which uses algorithms to analyze and structure unlabeled data.

In the above situations,as argued by Ethan Katsh[8]and Lodder[9],the intelligent software or technological part that provides the platform and dispute resolution mechanism is considered as a fourth party or a fifth party,after the disputants and the judge/arbitrator.Other forms of AI technologies include natural language processing to analyze natural languages,speeches and sentiment analysis,to identify and categorize opinions out of a text.Other developments are also made like quantitative justice based on probability of success or failure.

3.1 Advantages of Applying AI in Outer Space Dispute Resolution

Applying AI in dispute resolution frameworks,specifically to outer space dispute resolution procedures,poses multiple advantages,including efficiency,accuracy,accessibility,and cost effectiveness.

3.1.1 Enhancing dispute resolution efficiency and cost-effectiveness

AI systems have the potential to process large amounts of data,information and documents,ultimately shortening the time consumption of legal procedures and provision for a faster decision.

AI can change the production and consumption of legal services and dispute resolution mechanisms specifically,or even may change the nature of law itself,which poses for higher efficiency,openness,transparency,and personalization of legal services.

AI-based outer space dispute resolution mechanisms can significantly reduce the cost of dispute resolutions,by reducing the fees related to documentation,research,case preparation,legal services and all other costs so charged.

3.1.2 Precision and accuracy in decision making

AI technologies are capable of carrying out diligent and thorough legal research with unrivaled precision by combing through massive databases of legal papers,statutes,rules,and case law,extracting and summarizing essential information in real time and with high accuracy.

AI reduces the danger of overlooking important precedents or relevant legislation,ensuring that lawyers have access to a comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge base for their cases.

AI can provide historical context and trends,allowing legal professionals to obtain insights into how specific legal situations have changed over time.

AI’s ability to evaluate and analyze legal papers is a game changer in the legal industry.Its ability to locate vital information within papers is unparalleled.It is capable of doing so automatically.

3.1.3 Accessibility of dispute resolution to space faring states and non-state actors

These systems have the potential to establish a seamless atmosphere for online conflict resolution,which is especially beneficial for parties located in different geographical areas.

AI-powered dispute resolution removes the need for expensive travel and lodging,making dispute resolution more accessible and cheaper for individuals and companies.

3.1.4 Enhancing consistency in application of legal principles and precedents

AI in the legal system plays a crucial role in ensuring the consistent application of legal principles and precedents,helping to mitigate the influence of personal biases in decision-making.

It enhances decision-making predictability and uniformity while working to eliminate bias.The use of AI technology contributes to the preservation and enhancement of fundamental legal ideals,including equal treatment under the law,procedural fairness,transparency,and access to justice.

In this regard,AI systems also have the ability to learn and improve their performance over time,adjusting to changes in legal legislation and case trends.[10]

3.1.5 Establishing transparency and accountability

Advances in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) have the potential to bring accountability and transparency to the decision-making process,facilitating the comprehension and contestation of decisions made by AI.

Saliency maps,attention mechanisms,rule-based explanations,and model-agnostic approaches are a few examples of XAI techniques that improve interpretability and foster transparency and trust in AI systems.

3.2 Suggestions for A Global AI Forum for Outer Space Dispute Resolution

3.2.1 Feasibility of a global AI forum for outer space dispute resolution

The alarming increase in space exploration by public and private actors,will probably cause a potential increase in space disputes,as with the diversification of interest in space area.The increase in outer space disputes with the existing flawed dispute resolution mechanisms will further intensify the apprehension of the international community.

An international AI forum,dedicated for outer space dispute resolutions,could be established to fill the gap and flaws in the existing outer space dispute resolution mechanisms,as AI is unique in nature being self-developing through intelligent techniques.

Fundamental space principles and principles of general international law shall be kept protected.This AI forum will be an independent and neutral third party,not based on political whims,and would not be affected by political pressure groups.

This proposal does not propose a complete separate new body for dispute resolutions,rather it proposes to create an AI forum under the umbrella of existing UNCOPUOS framework.The existing UNCOPUOS includes a legal subcommittee,although not working as a dispute resolving body,rather working as an analyst of state party’s activities in outer space and their implications.When applying AI in outer space dispute resolutions,the UNCOPUOS legal subcommittee could be the appropriate body for hosting an AI dispute resolution forum.

3.2.2 Compliance with International Treaties

Incorporating a pioneering framework for dispute settlement in space,such as the AI-based forum that has been proposed here,is an endeavor that is full of complex challenges that transcend the mere logistical concerns.These challenges include the complex questions of jurisdiction,the intricacies of its establishment,and the difficulties of its enforceability.

Although in the sphere of international law,the United Nations Charter’s Article 7 stands out as a crucial piece of legislation that gives some protection and legitimacy to the creation of sub-organs when it’s thought necessary.

Moreover,Article 26 or the Statute of the ICJ stipulates that the Court may form specific chambers to deal with particular categories of cases,such as labour cases or cases relating to transit and communications.These provisions essentially clear the path for the development of an AI-powered system intended to settle conflicts that may arise in the vast reaches of space.It provides a legal basis for these kinds of activities in addition to recognizing the essential need for specialized frameworks.

Nevertheless,it is essential to mention that although the Statute of the ICJ does provide for the formation of a subject-specific chamber,the court’s jurisdictional constraints and authority do not perfectly match the complex principles of space law.In the context of space operations,this misalignment presents a considerable hindrance to effective dispute resolution.

The intricacies of outer space law,as well as the various challenges posed by activities taking place beyond the Earth’s atmosphere,a jurisdictional framework that comprehensively takes into account the characteristics of space disputes is necessary.While providing a basis,the existing global dispute resolution mechanisms might need to be further enhanced and modified to satisfy the unique requirements of space-related disputes.This calls for a comprehensive overview of the existing mechanisms as well as a vigilant strategy to promise that the principles of fairness,justice,and accountability are respected in this increasingly significant endeavor.

3.2.3 Dispute resolution procedures and limitations

The AI dispute resolution forum would be an open forum providing locus standi to both state parties and non-state space actors.In most of the cases,decision enforcement is the real hurdle in an organization.At first the parties would be required to submit to the decision of the forum.Moreover,if a party refuss to enforce,the UNCUPUOS could be a possible body to develop a mechanism for enforcement of the decisions.

The AI dispute resolution forum would be based on the Lex Lata principle for outer space dispute resolutions,and respect current effective international law rules as provided under general international law principles or international treaties.

This will provide a speedy dispute resolution mechanism where parties would go online to submit their case on the dispute,a short period of time would be given to the parties to review any information or data,modify any part of the case.AI would then process the case in accordance with international space law,general international law principles and norms,and would provide a decision of the dispute.The decision would be a preliminary one and if the parties accent to add more information,a short period of time would be given to the parties again before the final decision is announced.

The decision of this AI forum would create space law precedents and would be used in future as precedents.The information the parties desire to keep confidential would be kept confidential and would not be public,other than that the decision would be publicized for convenience of spacefarers.Moreover,a onetime review right would be given to the parties in a specified time to file for the review of the decision to the AI forum again for their convenience.

Further peculiarities of this AI forum are laid out in Table 1.

3.3 Possible Future Work

Future research may focus on framing a wholesome international AI based legal framework solely focused on space disputes,clearly and thoroughly laying down the framework’s jurisdiction,guidelines for dispute resolutions,enforcement of decisions,roles and responsibilities of stakeholders,all-inclusive space faring nations,private sector,AI and legal experts.Specific rules and guidelines for the AI forum for dispute resolution procedures,selecting and educating AI arbitrators,maintaining evidence,and decision implementation.Further,suitable and sustainable financial models for the AI forum,including commitments from member states,private organizations,and space agencies,self-educating models,adaptation of technological advancement shall be enshrined and adopted.For the purpose of ensuring accountability and transparency,monitoring procedures by impartial international bodies should also be implemented.In conclusion,the formation of a comprehensive legal framework,a sturdy governance structure,concise minimum standards,self-sustaining financing mechanisms,strict monitoring and supervision,technological developments,ethical standards,collaboration,stakeholder inclusion,and crisis response mechanisms should all be included in the future work for the AI-based dispute resolution forum for space.Together,these constituents could enable the forum to cope with the challenges of effectiveness and competence in the settlement of disputes in outer space.

4 CONCLUSION

Space exploration and utilization,once a futuristic concept,is now a common arena.The interest of the private sector is pushing towards space tourism,business activities and more in outer space.This newfound interest of private space farers is poised to redesign the basic concept of space exploration and utilization.This increasing interest of space farers,all inclusive of states and the private sector,in outer space activities brings the concern of space disputes between space actors,including the private sector.Space disputes are multifarious,including disputes over property rights,space agreements and more,proposing needs for effective,efficient and adequate outer space dispute resolutions.

The existing dispute resolution mechanisms including domestic dispute resolution methodologies,diplomatic means or international judicial or alternative dispute resolution methodologies,with limited jurisdiction,political ups and downs,lack of experience,lengthy and costly procedures hinders efficiency and effectiveness.

The current space dispute resolution methods remain predominantly reliant on human driven dispute settlement mechanisms.Therefore,an AI forum could be able to help improve the current outer space dispute resolution frameworks,through its accessibility,equity,efficiency and effectiveness,operating independent of human politics,capable of providing binding legal decisions,etc.Although it cannot solve all the problems discussed above,it would certainly be useful for the purpose of maintaining a peaceful and harmonious outer space environment.