“…space has its limits/Rockets a launching/Sat’lites are orbiting
Explosions in Space/Oh what a waste/Fragments go flying”
– S. Thuy Nguyen-Onstott.

Space debris: Growing Mess in Orbit

In June 2022, a fragment of an old Soviet satellite nearly struck the International Space Station. It was a narrow escape, but also a warning. Decades of unchecked launches have turned our planet’s orbit into a celestial junkyard. Every minute, thousands of fragments zip through orbit, each one a bullet threatening the satellites we depend on. Yet, despite mounting risks, international law treats this orbital chaos with little more than polite suggestions.

Space debris – consisting of artificial objects, such as defunct satellites, spent rocket stages, and other man-made materials – orbits the Earth, posing risks to operational spacecraft and astronauts. The urgency of addressing space debris has never been greater. The exponential rise of mega-constellations such as SpaceX’s Starlink, OneWeb, and Amazon’s Kuiper has transformed low Earth orbit into a crowded and contested zone. The increase of private actors, along with the resurgence of military satellite programmes and anti-satellite tests, has made debris not merely a technical hazard but a geopolitical flashpoint. The debate on orbital sustainability, therefore, is no longer about scientific prudence but about global governance and accountability. A significant concern is the Kessler Syndrome, a theoretical scenario proposed by Donald J. Kessler in 1978, where cascading collisions between orbital debris could render near-Earth space unusable for extended periods.

Controlling debris growth requires international cooperation and stringent regulations to prevent further accumulation from failed launches and satellite breakups. Debris raises economic and political concerns about cost allocation and responsibility for cleanup efforts. The removal of space debris is essential for protecting active satellites, ensuring safe human spaceflight, and maintaining the long-term usability of outer space for scientific, commercial, and military applications. It also safeguards the space environment from the formation of a “debris belt” that could hinder future missions, offering a cost-effective alternative to constant collision avoidance and satellite replacements.

The Law’s Blind Spot

Humanity has turned Earth’s orbit into a landfill, yet international law treats it with astonishing leniency. Global space governance encompasses international, regional, and national laws, regulatory bodies, technical standards, and codes of conduct governing space activities. International space law consists of binding instruments (e.g., treaties, and national regulations) and non-binding agreements (e.g., guidelines, and voluntary commitments).

The legal framework for space governance originated in 1919 with laws recognising national sovereignty over airspace. However, the Cold War and the launch of Sputnik 1 (1957) necessitated dedicated space laws. This led to the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) in 1958, which was later made permanent in 1959. Legal and technical subcommittees assisted in its work. UN COPUOS and UNOOSA laid the groundwork for space law through five core treaties, yet none explicitly or operationally addressed the problem of orbital debris mitigation , a gap that became visible only in the 21st century. While Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty obliges States to conduct space activities to ‘avoid harmful contamination,’ Gupta & Agasti’s interpretation suggests that this clause primarily addresses planetary protection and biological contamination and Jarose’s analysis clarifies that ‘due regard’ operates as a general conduct obligation that requires contextual balancing of interests and not the regulation of orbital debris or space traffic externalities.

The growing crisis of space debris reveals a troubling gap in global governance. From the Outer Space Treaty to the IADC’s voluntary guidelines, the rules that keep our satellites safe depend largely on goodwill. As India and other emerging space powers join the race beyond Earth, the question is not whether we can explore space sustainably, but whether our legal imagination can keep up.

India and the New Space Race

The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), established in 1969, operates under the Department of Space (DOS). India lacks dedicated space legislation, with space activities regulated by the ISRO Act (1969) and National Remote Sensing Centre Guidelines (2011). However, the Space Activities Bill, once enacted, will significantly impact the sector by integrating private enterprises.

The Indian National Space Promotion and Authorization Centre (IN-SPACe), created in 2020, facilitates private sector participation by licensing and monitoring commercial space activities. The proposed Space Activities Bill applies to all Indian citizens and sectors engaged in space activities, requiring government licensing for commercial ventures and mandating a national registry of space objects. It establishes professional and technical support mechanisms, regulates intellectual property rights in space activities, and imposes penalties for unauthorised space operations.

Can Cooperation Work Without Teeth?

The Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) is an “international forum of governmental bodies for the coordination of activities related to the issues of man-made and natural debris in space.” The Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines outline globally recognised best practices for minimising orbital waste. They emphasise cost-effective measures, such as limiting debris release, preventing on-orbit breakups, ensuring post-mission disposal, and avoiding collisions. Operators are urged to design spacecraft responsibly and carry out controlled re-entry or disposal manoeuvres to prevent long-term contamination.

Around the world, space agencies are experimenting with debris removal. The European Space Agency’s RemoveDebris and NASA’s SpaDE projects test active removal and re-entry technologies, while Japan’s CRD2, China’s SJ-21, and Russia’s Milky Way program showcase growing innovation in tracking and relocating defunct satellites.

India, too, has joined the effort. Through ISRO’s IS4OM  and Project NETRA, the country monitors orbital threats and enhances collision prevention. Its Debris Free Space Missions (DFSM) initiative, set to begin this year, plans to achieve debris-free operations by 2030 – a step toward a cleaner, safer orbit.

The Problem

Despite their wide acceptance, IADC guidelines lack legal enforcement, relying on voluntary compliance from spacefaring nations and organisations, leaving debris mitigation largely ineffective. Compliance rates are modest, with just over half of Low Earth Orbit payloads complying with the rules and even after fifteen years after the introduction of these guidelines, adherence remains disappointingly low, particularly in LEO, where the space environment continues to deteriorate.

The core issue lies in the legal framework governing space debris, as debris removal programs by space agencies operate independently, each following its own standards. More importantly, the guidelines adhered to by these agencies have no binding effect on private players. This lack can also be placed in the historical dominance of the United States and the former Soviet Union in the space race, whose early technological lead allowed them to shape the normative architecture of space governance in ways that continue to privilege Western state and commercial interests. Notably, these same spacefaring powers account for the vast majority of space debris: for example, the United States and China together account for thousands of trackable debris objects, with France, India, and other nations contributing comparatively far less.

Since the IADC guidelines are voluntary and lack enforcement mechanisms, they are ineffective in ensuring compliance, particularly concerning debris removal. As “soft law,” these guidelines are perceived as less binding, with no legal accountability for non-compliance. Many scholars now argue for a shift toward “hard law”: clear, binding obligations backed by accountability. Without such reform, space governance will continue to drift, and the vision of a sustainable orbital environment will remain out of reach.

A Better Framework for Accountability

To address the inefficiencies in space debris governance, two solutions are being proposed – enhancing space situational awareness (SSA) and establishing a regulatory framework for treating space debris as abandoned property.

1. Strengthening Space Situational Awareness (SSA)

Effective SSA is critical for monitoring orbital debris, assessing collision risks, and implementing mitigation strategies. ISRO’s IS4OM and Project NETRA demonstrate efforts to enhance debris tracking and collision avoidance, and similarly, other space agencies like ESA have their own projects. However, enhancing SSA to achieve a global requirement warrants real-time data fusion, advanced tracking technologies like AI-based predictive modelling, ground-based radar systems, optical telescopes, and space-based sensors to improve collision forecasting accuracy. Given the increasing congestion in orbit, robust international cooperation is quintessential to enable standardised data-sharing protocols, synchronised observation networks, and automated space traffic management systems. Collaborative initiatives, such as multilateral agreements on space object cataloguing and cross-agency coordination, will be key to ensuring effective Collision Avoidance Manoeuvres (CAMs) and maintaining the long-term sustainability of space activities. If such enhanced SSA systems can conclusively attribute debris to its source, they may function as an evidentiary bridge between scientific detection and legal responsibility, enabling failures to avoid debris generation to be framed as breaches of the Article IX obligation to ‘avoid harmful contamination,’ and thereby converting otherwise general and non-prescriptive duties into enforceable State obligations through attribution.

2. Regulating Space Debris as Abandoned Property

A robust legal approach, as proposed by Chelsea Muñoz-Patchen, is to treat space debris as abandoned property, thereby eliminating ownership ambiguities that hinder cleanup efforts. She proposes a market-share liability regime, where nations contribute to debris removal based on their share of debris generation. This approach would shift space debris management from voluntary compliance to legally binding obligations, ensuring adherence to international treaties such as the Outer Space Treaty. Implementing such a framework would incentivise responsible space behaviour and provide sustainable funding for large-scale debris removal.

3. Attribution and continued responsibility

However, treating space debris as abandoned property comes with its own risk, as it might also negate a primary obligation of prevention, as a recognised right to abandon would weaken attribution and excuse responsibility once objects become non-functional. A more comprehensive approach, consistent with Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA) principles of attribution and continuing State responsibility, would impose mandatory prevention and remediation duties, enforced through SSA-based performance assessments and debris-linked levies on States and private actors, thereby anchoring compliance in obligation rather than goodwill.

Furthermore, recent multi-nation space projects, most importantly the Artemis Accords, to which India is a signatory, strengthen the commitment towards Outer Space Treaty principles. The Accord itself reads: “The Artemis Accords signatories commit to plan for the mitigation of orbital debris, including the safe, timely, and efficient disposal of spacecraft at the end of their missions.” By expressly linking due regard, harmful interference, and end-of-mission disposal to State responsibility, extending to private actors under national jurisdiction, the Accords illustrate how soft-law frameworks can progressively reinforce accountability in space governance.

Closing Orbit

Space debris poses a significant challenge to the sustainability of outer space while threatening satellites and space missions. The absence of legally binding enforcement measures within international governance frameworks has resulted in poor compliance and the continuous generation of space debris. Governments are beginning to take action, such as India’s new policy on outer space activities, and some space agencies have started carrying out active debris removal missions. India aims to emulate models like the U.S., where private players (e.g., SpaceX) drive industry growth. But for that, addressing space debris and ensuring sustainable space exploration will be critical. As Prof. Sergio Marchisio states, effective State control over private actors through Articles VI and VIII of the Outer Space Treaty is indispensable, especially for addressing space debris under State-centric liability regimes.  However, independent attempts lack coordination and fail to impose accountability on private enterprises. Voluntary commitments are ineffective in controlling the growth of space debris. SSA enhancement combined with market-share liability creates a somewhat proper framework for accountable debris mitigation. Without urgent intervention, space poses a danger to scientific progress and business expansion. If global governance cannot compel accountability in orbit, a wholly human-made ecosystem, it risks proving unfit for the Anthropocene itself.

---

Boibaswata Chakraborty is a third-year BA.LLB (Hons.) student at the National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi and serves as Convenor of the Chair on Consumer Research and Policy, NUSRL, Ranchi.

---

Picture Credit: University of Arizona