1. United Nations Practice in Registering Space Objects
Natercia Rodrigues
Programme Management Officer
United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs

2. Legislative framework Role of the United Nations
Contents
Legislative framework
Role of the United Nations
Registration Practices of States
Conclusion
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

3. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
Resolution 1721 B (XVI)
1961, first mechanism, voluntary basis
A/AC.105/INF symbol series
Still vital for States not party to Reg. Convention
427 documents on over 2,000 space objects
Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Thailand and Venezuela
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

4. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
Registration Convention
1974
Registration mandatory for State Parties
Clarified type of information to be provided
740 documents on over 4000 space objects
ST/SG/SER.E symbol
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

5. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
Resolution 62/101
2007
Specific recommendations to harmonize registration practices
Practical means for provision of additional information
Paragraph 4 (date of change in supervision, identification of the new owner or operator)
Paragraph 5 (model registration form)
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

6. ROLE OF UNOOSA Mandate limited
No modifications without prior consultation
Informal engagement on non-registration
Online index
Tool to facilitate research
Official and unofficial information
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

7. STATE PRACTICe AsiaSat-1, Asia-Sat-2, APSTAR-I and APSTAR-IA
Evident bilateral agreement
Information submitted simultaneously 
UK (space objects in question ceased to be carried on the UK registry; UK no longer State of registry) 
China (space objects carried on the Register of Space Objects of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China; China is the State of registry)
Online index (China (formerly UK) appears under State of Registry; Remarks column)

8. BSB-1 (SIRIUS 1/Marcopolo 1)
1990 UK registered satellite
1999 Sweden registered satellite (Bought in orbit in 1996)
2000 Sweden provided additional information
2007 UK submitted supplementary information
Online index (both UK & Sweden indicated under the State of Registry)

9. Inmarsat
USA for Inmarsat or ESA for Inmarsat
2002
Satellites I2-F2, I2-F3, I2-F4, I3-F1, I3-F2, I3-F3, I3-F4 and 13-F5
Article XI OST and Article IV of Registration Convention
Not the “launching State”, “State of registry”, or “launching authority”
UN Registered: No
Subsequent Satellites (2005 →)
UN Registered: Yes
State of Registry: United Kingdom
Eutelsat
ESA for Eutelsat; France for Eutelsat
France

10. New Sky Satellites (eg NSS-7)
Article XI OST (Not the “launching State”, “State of registry”, or “launching authority” )
Lanuched and positioned in orbit by persons not subject to the jurisdiction or control of The Netherlands
“Following transfer in orbit of ownership of the space objects …it bears international responsibility … has jurisdiction and control over them …”
2009 The Netherlands informed on inclusion of satellite in the national part of its registry of objects launched into outer space (date of in-orbit arrival of the object, date of legal transfer)
UN Registerd: no
State of Registry: unknown
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

11. ARTEMIS State of Registry: ESA SENTINEL 1A
October 2014 ESA registered satellite and informed on transfer of ownership to EU
Online index
ESA State of Registry
Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communication Law: Ownership of Satellites,
4-5 June 2015

12. Conclusion
Different approaches to a change in supervision and/or change in ownership
Still insufficient number of instances officially informed for specific conclusions
Different terminology: ‘bought in orbit’, transfer of ownership’, ‘change in supervision’.
Absence of more robust guidance
Continue to informal engagement
Be consistent in online index and explore enhancement