Imagine that when a heavy metal object suddenly crashes in front of a house, you will happen. You and your neighbors are shocked. You hurriedly checked what was going on and couldn’t understand your sight: a stereotypical piece of hot metal, blackened by fire and smoke, with a cloud of dust around it.
This is not a scene in a sci-fi movie. On December 30, 2024, 500 kilograms of metal objects fell in Makueni County, Kenya. Experts from Kenya Space Agency describe it as a separation ring from a rocket with limited space. Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer known for categorizing space to launch objects in orbit, has expressed doubts that the object is part of a rocket, which repeatedly reminds people of pressing space problems ahead of similar events in the United States and Australia.
Space activity is getting faster and faster as the country launches more rockets, satellites and spacecraft. Debris fall also challenges laws that protect humanity. The biggest problem with accountability: When debris collapses to the earth, who is responsible and how to deal with it?
Legal space fragments
Although it is a key issue in space governance, space debris lacks a recognized legal definition in international treaties. The generally accepted definition of work comes from the Inter-Agency Coordination Committee on Space Debris and the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS). Therefore, the latter refers to space debris: “Space debris are man-made objects, including debris and their elements, in Earth’s orbit or reentering the atmosphere, they are non-functional.”
Given the lack of definition, legal disputes often depend on whether a piece of debris is eligible to be the “space object” in the 1972 Convention on International Damage Caused by Space Objects. This distinction is crucial. Because the responsibility assumed by the object of space under the Convention is crucial, but if debris is no longer under the jurisdiction of the state, then responsibility becomes even more challenging.
Article 6 of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 constitutes the cornerstone of international space law. It said that countries are responsible for all national space activities, whether carried out by governments or private entities. The 1972 Convention also introduced “absolute responsibility” for damage caused by space objects on Earth. Unlike fault-based liability, absolute liability does not require proof of negligence: the launching state automatically causes damage caused by its debris.
Not only technical
But law enforcement remains a crucial challenge. Disputes resolve disputes in diplomatic negotiations, often resulting in long settlements not meeting actual costs. In 1978, the Soviet Satellite Universe 954, which crashed in Canada in 1978, Canada spent years negotiating with the Soviet Union and eventually received only $3 million of the estimated $6 million in cleaning costs. The case highlights the gap between legal liability and actual execution, leaving affected parties vulnerable to insufficient resolutions.
If debris from resolved satellites cause damage decades later, will the original launch status still be held responsible? This legal uncertainty also weakens the effectiveness of existing liability frameworks and complicates law enforcement.
Attributing debris to its source adds another layer of complexity. While advanced tracking systems and forensic analyses can often track debris, such as identifying Soviet-era components or SpaceX fragments, older, undocumented objects or highly fragmented debris can violate identification.
Governance gap
The surge in space activity around the world and the repeated use of rockets and rocket parts put uncontrolled re-entry risks. Earlier this month, fragments from the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket landed in Poland. But the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said that its oversight ended when SpaceX lost control of the Rockets. The response illustrates an increasing concern: Once the spatial object is no longer actively controlled, an unclear authority is responsible for its reentry or any damage it may cause.
In July 2024, China’s long-term 5B rocket core stage was a 23-ton metal behemoth, uncontrollably entering the South Pacific, narrowly avoiding densely populated areas. This is the fourth such re-entry activity for a rocket since 2020 and has reignited a global alarm on space debris.
Unlike more modern rockets (with designed and machined parts that can be completely burned during reentry or able to rotate in remote areas, the lack of disposal mechanisms on the core stage on March 5 makes its descent a game of orbital roulette. Although China has improved the prediction of reentry, warnings are usually too late for other states.
These events reveal another obvious gap in space governance: There are no binding rules that punish uncontrolled re-entry until damage is caused. Space agencies condemn risks such as “reckless”, but without international regulations, these warnings have no legal weight.
By 2030, the rapid growth of large-scale satellite construction, such as SpaceX Starlink, Amazon Kuiper and Eutelsat’s OneWeb, will add more than 100,000 satellites, increasing the risk of uncontrolled re-entry. Many older satellites also lack analytical plans, causing deterioration in orbit debris accumulation. While small satellites usually burn, larger objects, such as rocket boosters and fuel tanks, are often re-entering, posing a threat. In 2022, fragments of SpaceX’s crew capsule crashed in Australia.
Guidelines such as the UN’s rules for satellite blurring machines within 25 years are still voluntary, with only 30% compliance leaving thousands of rotting satellites in unpredictable orbits.
What needs to be changed?
The world urgently needs regulatory clarity to save it from the overall problem: there is no mandatory supervision of reentry unless direct harm occurs. Without emergency reform, uncontrolled re-entry will become more frequent and affected communities will continue to bear costs without pursuing.
The world needs stronger regulations. First, Copuos must strive to control re-entry and penalties for the unqualified participants. At the same time, governments should strengthen domestic policies and require companies to adopt debris mitigation strategies as a condition for obtaining launch permits.
Disposal rules should be mandatory and require spaceflight entities to have controlled re-entry or move to cemetery orbit (move disabled satellites to avoid collisions with other satellites). These needs should be achieved through sanctions or the introduction of bans.
Second, improved tracking systems such as the expansion of US space fences can improve surveillance and re-entry predictions. Sustainable space practices should also be inspired, including debris neutral technology and reusable rockets to reduce debris in orbit and enhance long-term safety.
Finally, the 1972 Liability Convention must be modernized to include an independent international tribunal with binding enforcement rights.
Space is not a lawless boundary, but it is possible to become a person without decisive action. The time for the voluntary guidelines is over: global cooperation, enforceable rules and accountability mechanisms must be prioritized, and then the sky really starts to fall.
Shrawani Shagun is pursuing a PhD degree at the National Law University of Delhi, focusing on environmental sustainability and space governance.
publishing – March 6, 2025 at 05:30 am
