Legitimacy of Mars Land Claim (possession)
Legal right to sell mars land claims (communal possession)
Strength of claim against space law
STRENGTH OF CLAIM AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW
LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING TO FORMAL ARBITRATION / DUE PROCESS
LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING A SPACE TREATY UPDATE
LIKELIHOOD OF GAINING TITLE REGISTRATION TO LAND ON MARS
HOW IS ALL THIS LEGAL & LEGITIMATE?:
In Public International law (just as in private law e.g squatting / adverse possession), the required proof for Factual Possession (or “Effective Occupation”) is very dependent on the nature of the land claimed. For distant, difficult and rather barren land there is NO requirement for human settlement or established trading of resources. Also the old colonial flag-planting method is long outdated. For such difficult land on Earth, an honest claim can be legally and robustly made through the demonstration of “intent to possess/occupy” and some sustained, exclusive governance/control measures, ideally with some early or preparatory benefit to the land involved.
Our land claim to Mars is based on exactly this requirement in international law. We are perfectly correct to declare that, in geographical terms, Mars land is certainly difficult, distant and rather barren. It is difficult to settle and set up a vibrant trading business. Our governance/control measures include the development of our communal land claim (based on a single, exclusive sustained act of possession for over 6 years). They also involve the repeated acurate targetting of Mars with strong laser light. Such class 4 lasers impart a very small amount of light energy to Mars (120 photons per square meter per second)… but this is NOT negligible. Indeed, with a suitable detector it could be measured on Mars. The positive effect upon land, atmosphere (and primitive photosynthetic life, should it still exist there) would be small but definate… a measurable non-zero effect. Such an effect should be regarded as small but relevent rather than small and trivial. This will be the “battleground” in court for our claim … not weak space laws of the loophole riddled Outer Space Treaty… (have a look for yourself: our Earth based actions are not stopped by any of the OST articles, including 2 and 6).
NOTE ALSO: With an honest claim that is openly based on international law (and is not obviously prevented by space law), it is entirely legal to sell off parts of this land claim (via claim certificates to claimants who join us here) in order to raise funds for the looming legal process (The recent Philippines V China land claim case cost many millions of dollars). Note, we are selling land claims in which new claimants join in our communal land claim (based on a single, sustained and exclusive act of possession). These real claim certificates are very different from those expensive novelty “deeds” sold by websites like lunar embassy, moon estates and buymars. Those deeds have no legal basis (and avoid legal challenge by having a “novelty gift” stamp in small print on each certificate).
Our claims are solidly based on good modern international law and are not novelties (despite the tiny prices) and are now being advanced towards international legal arbitration.
DONT MISS OUT! … JOIN US NOW!
SO, the facts:
- The 50 years old Outer Space Treaty (OST) is the only real law preventing nuclear weapons getting into orbit and outer space.
- The OST is being pushed aside and devalued because it is seen as outdated and “bad for business”.
- Because the UN has failed to update the OST to include rules for space commerce, individual nations are now making up their own laws which make a mockery of the old OST.
- Understandably, after years of frustration, the US was obliged to make its own space laws (for space business and mining)… but in doing so they break the OST rules. Now another less benevolent country could feasably place nuclear weaponry in orbit claiming that the US was the first nation to break up the only law that stops this action (OST).
- The weak UN knows that an update to space law is needed (to deal with business and celestial exploitation) … but with 77 member states on the committee (COPUOS) they can’t get consensus.
- The member states of the UN committee need a strong stimulus to sting them into action.
- A vocal campaign with strong social media support wont be enough to kick the UN committee into action.
- A bold, shockingly unexpected, legal claim to celestial land (Mars) could shake them up … especially if, in an international court, it was shown the the OST was too weak to block the claim.
- A formal international court arbitration could show the need for urgent OST updating by threading the Mars land claim right through one of the several loopholes.
- As well as prompting the UN to update the OST (the only law that prevents nuclear weapons in orbit/space), the legitimate land claim to Mars might actually lead to land title registration for all the co-claimants involved. This is quite a modest chance (the “proof bar” within international law might be raised higher for the strategic value of Mars compared to equally barren land on Earth). Nevertheless, it will challenge hard and might succeed.
- With a real chance of influencing peace for future generations and a modest but genuine chance of Mars land entitlement, many people are joining the Mars land claim (buying land claim certificates). The small price for each claim (part of a communal claim) goes towards the cost of international legal arbitration.
- Already the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague has indicated that it could feasably arbitrate on our claim (the “right to due process” and the title land claim itself). The member states of COPUOS know that they cannot easily refuse us our right to legal due process. Whether in a bespoke UN registry/court, the ICJ or PCA, we anticipate such a formal process will be held next year, 2017, that being the 50th anniversary of the OST.
- Currently our claim and application for Mars land registration has been received and acknowledged by the UN (UNOOSA), Head of UK Delegation to COPUOS and the British Government (via FCO). Currently, there are no other such sustained, legally valid claims to possession of celestial land. Note that our exclusive claim has remained exclusive for over 6 years despite the robotic landings and explorations on Mars during that time. Such activities are conducted via national responsibilities (within OST articles or law) and are therefore not associated with any threat or counter-claim of possession. Thus our claim can successfully tolerate such visitations to Mars just as a land claimant on Earth would tolerate visitations and maintenance activities of utility agencies.
We think there are way too many people out there that have never even heard of space laws or the Outer Space Treaty (OST). Its the ONLY law that stops weapons of mass destruction being placed in orbit or deeper space. But now it is being brushed aside (for separate reasons to do with space commerce and mining). We cannot afford to lose this vital law; so in order to re-assert itself it needs updated… SOON!
Otherwise THIS could happen…
- After many years without UN agreement on how to incorporate a framework for space business (exploration and mining etc), the US passed its own space laws in 2015. They break the rules of the Outer Space Treaty (an act of sovereignty).
- Other countries, including Russia and China, are unhappy with this unilateral break from the OST rules, but silently start developing their own plans/laws.
- Within 10 years (before 2025), commercial US missions to an asteroid and perhaps Mars are launched. In line with the US Space Act 2015, the space companies involved declare their right to the valuable resources (platinum etc) obtained from the celestial bodies.
- Other space faring countries, including Russia and China strongly protest against this declaration and action. The US maintains its position.
- Russia or China launch into orbit the necessary components for nuclear weaponry. They state that this is just a deterent and a demonstration of their dissatisfaction with US support for their companies’ actions. When challenged that their actions break the OST rules, they again state that they have not actually contructed the nuclear weapon in space (yet) and remind us that it was the US that first broke up the OST by ratifying the US Space Act 2015.
- At this point anything can happen… but it is likely that other countries, including Europeans and US, will follow with nuclear weaponry components being launched into space. Also likely to follow will be a growing number of commercial celestial land claims, made stronger by the weakness of the largely ignored OST.
- Now, it may well be that the described case study results in a sensible mutilateral agreement to avoid the manufacture of nuclear weapons in orbit/space…. BUT… it is our firm opinion that once there are the nuclear weaponry components in space, the chance of them being used against Earth populations/cities is much higher than for equivalent weapons stationed on Earth. A remote controlled, masked nuclear attack would, with strategic and detached humanization, become all too easy. It would become even more likely if an aggressive rivalry for celestial land acquisition developed (a “land rush”), something which could easily happen as the damaged OST is further degraded and ignored.
The key to avoiding a nuclear war that starts in space and targets Earth is to NEVER have such weapons loaded into orbit. Currently the OST stops this…. but without updating it will be kicked aside very soon.
“UN!… UPDATE THE OUTER SPACE TREATY!” … strengthen it against dangerous weapons and reckless land acquisitions whilst also adding some framework for space business and exploitation.
SADLY, IN ORDER TO JOLT THE UN INTO ACTION, IT LOOKS AS THOUGH WE WILL HAVE TO OPENLY SHOW THE OST LOOPHOLES (IN COURT) BY WALKING OUR CLAIM RIGHT THROUGH ONE OF THEM.
SO, “BE CRUEL TO BE KIND” AND JOIN OUR MARS LAND CLAIM NOW!