The GPS Galileo GNSS Agreement, Implications for Peaceful International Relations: An Analysis of Articles 4(2), 12, and 16 of the “Agreement on the Promotion, Provision, and Use of Galileo and GPS Satellite-Based Navigation Systems”

Paper number

IAC-10,E7,1,28,x8496

Author

Mr. Michael Dodge, Institute of Air and Space Law, McGill University, Canada

Year

2010

Abstract

Recognizing the import of the emerging Galileo system, in 2004 the United States and the European Community signed the Agreement on the Promotion, Provision, and Use of Galileo and GPS Satellite-Based Navigation Systems and Related Applications.  The Agreement provides for the use of positioning, navigation, and timing services (PNT) provided by the GPS and Galileo satellite constellations, and it is designed to be a tool for the promotion of security and peaceful relations on Earth and Outer Space.  However, to ensure that the very real benefit to humanity conferred by GNSS continues, the Agreement’s language must be analyzed for potentially ambiguous or questionable provisions.
The language of 4(2) is particularly germane to this discussion.  Article 4(2) of the Agreement reads “The Parties agree that GPS and Galileo shall be radio frequency compatible.  This paragraph shall not apply locally to areas of military operations.  The parties shall not unduly disrupt or degrade signals available for civil use.”  Different interpretations of the language from Article 4(2) could lead to substantially divergent policy decisions from the parties to the Agreement, the result of which could be inconsistent application of the policies of the Agreement, significant economic damage, or generation of international ill will harmful to peaceful relations on Earth and in space.  
This paper will argue the meaning behind ambiguous provisions in the Agreement should be clarified in order to ensure continued peaceful and secure relations between the Parties.  This paper will analyze the legal meaning behind the language “unduly disrupt or degrade”.  Additionally, it will argue that the language regarding compatibility of radio frequencies requires further attention from the parties to the Agreement, and also that the Joint Statement issued by both the EC and the U.S. in 2008 is crucial to understanding the meaning behind Article 4(2).  The paper will also argue that the accountability of the parties to the Agreement substantially depends on the interpretation of ambiguous Agreement language, including articles 12 and 16.  Conclusions will be drawn based on established precedent in space law, as well as from theories of treaty interpretation.

Abstract document

IAC-10,E7,1,28,x8496.brief.pdf

Manuscript document

IAC-10,E7,1,28,x8496.pdf (🔒 authorized access only).

To get the manuscript, please contact IAF Secretariat.