The Chicago Convention, formed in 1944, was a watershed point in international
aviation history, attempting to govern the use of international airspace and
foster international collaboration. This critical examination looks at the
growth of sovereignty in international airspace, as defined by the Chicago
The Chicago Convention initially emphasised state sovereignty over its own
airspace, asserting a country's sole control over the skies above its territory.
This guiding principle sought to preserve each state's control and jurisdiction
over its airspace, matching conventional notions of sovereignty within national
The Convention acknowledged the importance of international cooperation in
ensuring safe and efficient air travel. This acknowledgement signified a
significant shift in the notion of sovereignty, shifting from total authority to
a balance of national interests and collective obligations. States agreed to
some constraints on their sovereignty in exchange for the formation of
international air routes and aviation standards.
Furthermore, the Chicago Convention, which established the International Civil
Aviation Organisation (ICAO), represented a shift away from unilateral
sovereignty and towards a multilateral approach. The International Civil
Aviation Organisation (ICAO) provides a forum for nations to discuss and agree
on common standards and practises, representing a collaborative effort to
harmonise rules and assure global aviation safety and development.
The restrictions on national sovereignty became more evident and necessary as
aviation technology evolved and air travel became more integrated. States began
to cooperate on a larger scale, putting communal benefits ahead of individual
interests. The emergence of regional treaties and organisations accelerated this
tendency, demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of sovereignty that took
into consideration both national rights and global duties.
The ownership of the air has been a topic of debate for thousands of years, with
the first regulation in the 1780s. State sovereignty became more important as
the number of states grew. The development of engine-powered aircraft in the
20th century led to the first aerial intruders, and the Chicago Convention on
Civil Aviation was established to govern the skies.
However, with the increasing
number of aircraft in the air, the number of mistakes has increased. Over the
last fifty years, many aircraft have wandered off their authorized routes into
foreign and forbidden air territories, leading to serious incidents and loss of
lives. The difference between civil and state aircraft is also debated, with the
general rule being that no violence is to be used on either group.
Scope Of Research
A Critical Analysis of the Chicago Convention" entails a thorough examination
and critique of how the concept of sovereignty has evolved in the field of
international airspace, with a special emphasis on the Chicago Convention.
The Chicago Convention of 1944 established the framework for international civil
aviation, emphasising states' sovereignty rights over their airspace. Over time,
challenges such as transnational threats and technological advancements have
prompted a re-evaluation of traditional notions of sovereignty. Scholars
highlight tensions between state sovereignty and global cooperation, advocating
for a balance to ensure safety and security.
According to the idea, the history of sovereignty in international airspace, as
established by the Chicago Convention, reflects a dynamic interplay between
state interests, technological advances, and changing global dynamics. Due to
the increasing interconnection of air transport, the Convention increasingly
accommodated shared duties and international collaboration, initially
emphasising state sovereignty.
According to the idea, this evolution has been
defined by a balance between states' desire to establish authority over their
airspace and the understanding of the necessity for collaborative governance to
assure global airspace safety, security, and efficiency.
- How has the notion and implementation of sovereignty evolved in international
airspace, including a critical examination of the significance and implications
of the Chicago Convention?
The concept of sovereignty in international airspace has changed dramatically
over time, with the 1944 Chicago Convention serving as a watershed milestone in
creating the laws and conventions regulating global airspace usage and
administration. This critical analysis aims to investigate the evolution of
sovereignty in international airspace by diving into the Chicago Convention's
essential clauses and consequences for state sovereignty and international
The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) established the Chicago
Convention, formally known as the Convention on International Civil Aviation, to
promote the safe and orderly development of international civil aviation. The
agreement set the groundwork for modern international aviation law, covering
issues such as airspace sovereignty, air navigation, safety, and environmental
The concept of sovereignty over airspace is one of the Chicago Convention's
fundamental principles. The convention's Article 1 states that each state has
complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory, which
includes both the territorial sea and the mainland.
This provision supports the
traditional concept of airspace sovereignty, which is based on the principle of
territorial integrity and holds that a state has control and jurisdiction over
the airspace above its land and territorial seas. The treaty also emphasises the
concept of sky freedom.
Article 1 recognises that airspace is not subject to
national appropriation in any way, and that all states have the right to fly
over other states' territory without obtaining permission. This acceptance of
overflight freedom implies a shift from absolute territorial sovereignty,
advocating the concept of a shared and open airspace for international civil
The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) was founded by the Chicago
Convention as the specialised institution in charge of managing international
aviation concerns. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) provides
as a forum for member countries to discuss and develop international standards
and recommended practises for the safety, security, efficiency, and
environmental sustainability of civil aviation. This institutional structure
encourages states to work together to guarantee a consistent approach to
aviation regulation, reinforcing the shifting character of sovereignty in the
context of international airspace.
As evidenced by the Chicago Convention, the growth of sovereignty in
international airspace illustrates the balance between a state's sovereign
rights over its airspace and the necessity for international collaboration to
maintain the safe and efficient operation of civil aviation. This careful
balance between sovereignty and cooperation is critical in handling modern
aviation's complexities and concerns, including as airspace congestion,
environmental effect, and technical improvements.
The Chicago Convention was crucial in defining the concept of sovereignty in
international airspace. It established the notion of exclusive territorial
sovereignty while also acknowledging overflight freedom and the need for
international collaboration through the ICAO. This dual approach exemplifies the
changing character of sovereignty, recognising both state control and collective
responsibility in regulating global airspace for the benefit of all.
Historical Back Ground Of Chicago Convention And ICAO
The Convention on International Civil Aviation was created in 1944 by 54 states
to advance collaboration and "create and preserve friendship and understanding
among the nations and peoples of the world."
The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), which has been in charge
of regulating international air travel ever since, was founded as a result of
this historic accord, which is more widely known as the "Chicago Convention."
The Second World War served as a potent catalyst for the airplane's technical
advancement. During this time, a sizable network of freight and passenger
transport was established, but it faced numerous political and technological
challenges as it transitioned to serve new civilian needs. The U.S.
administration invited 55 States to an international civil aviation conference
in Chicago in 1944 as a result of numerous studies it had started as well as
numerous consultations it had with the Major Allies. These delegates journeyed
to Chicago at tremendous personal risk and met during a very difficult period in
human history. They still held control over many of the nations they
Final attendance at the Chicago Conference was 54 of the 55 invited States, and
by the time it finished on December 7, 1944, 52 of those States had signed the
newly realised Convention on International Civil Aviation. This historic pact,
more known as the "Chicago Convention" today than it was back then, established
the guidelines and practises for safe international air travel. As its main
goal, it outlined the growth of international civil aviation "...in a safe and
orderly manner," with the establishment of air transport services "based on
equality of opportunity and operated soundly and economically."
The Chicago Convention also formally recognised the need for the establishment
of a specialised International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to coordinate
and support the extensive international cooperation that the developing global
air transport network would demand. The primary goal of ICAO, then as now, was
to assist States in achieving the greatest degree of uniformity in civil
aviation rules, standards, practises, and administration.
The Chicago Conference wisely agreed to an interim agreement that anticipated
the formation of a provisional ICAO (PICAO) to act as a temporary advising and
coordinating body due to the customary delays anticipated in ratifying the
Convention. The PICAO was made up of an Interim Council and an Interim Assembly.
Beginning in June 1945, the Interim Council, which included representatives from
21 Member States, convened regularly in Montreal, Canada.
In June 1946, Montreal
hosted the first Interim Assembly of the PICAO, which served as a forerunner to
the triennial Assemblies of the ICAO today. The temporary features of the PICAO
ceased to be applicable on April 4, 1947, when there were enough ratifications
of the Chicago Convention, and it was renamed the ICAO. In May of that year,
Montreal hosted the inaugural ICAO Assembly.
The Convention's Annexes have grown
in size and complexity during this transition to the modern era of air
transport, and as a result, they currently contain more than 12,000
international standards and recommended practises (SARPs), all of which have
been unanimously accepted by the ICAO's 193 Member States.
These SARPs, along
with the enormous technological advancements and contributions made in the
intervening decades by air transport operators and manufacturers, have made it
possible to realise the modern international air transport network, which is now
acknowledged as a crucial driver of socioeconomic development and one of
humanity's greatest cooperative achievements.
Collaboration In Air Navigation
The seamless running of air navigation operations is now required, and this can
be accomplished by the contracting parties' mutual collaboration. States should
support the respected state in order to ensure that the state to which the
aircraft belongs may do so easily and increase its operation.
This Convention requires the contracting state to take all reasonable steps to
facilitate and expedite the operation in order to prevent delays for the
aircraft and its passengers.
There should not be any obstruction to the regulations governing clearance,
quarantine, customs, or immigration. Additionally, governments should implement
corresponding customs and immigration processes in accordance with the standard
practise used in international air navigation.
Since each state has its own set of laws governing customs, an aircraft from
another state that arrives in a state should be admitted without paying taxes.
Additionally, upon arriving on the territory of another state, onboard
components including fuel, lubricants, spare parts, other necessary equipment,
and aircraft stores will not be subject to any customs duties.
Any equipment or spare parts imported for use in an aircraft engaged in
international air navigation should not be subject to a duty.
There may be situations when an aircraft landing on a state's territory needs
assistance because it is in some sort of distress. As a result, this convention
has established rules for it that stipulate whose territory the aircraft has
landed on is required to ensure that the necessary actions are performed and aid
is given to the aircraft in the event of any problems or difficulty.
The states should, to the fullest degree practicable, make provisions for
cooperation under the norms adopted in accordance with this convention whenever
any aircraft goes missing.
International Standards And Practices
To develop and enhance the air navigation services and to bring uniformity, all
standards established, methods, and regulations set governing the air facility
and auxiliary services must be consistent in all respects.
There will be developed worldwide standards, thus any contracting state that
wishes to implement a modification in its own practises that deviates from the
developed norm must notify the worldwide Civil Aviation Organisation without
Let's look at the issues that need to be resolved:
- channels for communication and ground-based navigational aids;
- information about the airports and landing zones in each state;
- laws and guidelines for air traffic control;
- granting the operational and mechanical staff a licence;
- airworthiness and identifying markings of the aircraft;
- aeroplane identification number;
- assembling and exchanging meteorological data;
- logbooks, maps, and charts for aviation;
- immigration and customs processes;
- awareness of distressed aircraft and thorough reporting on accident investigations.
If these requirements are not met, the airworthiness certificate for the
aircraft should state exactly what failed and why. If an employee hasn't done
his job correctly, the licence certificate should be appended with information
about the failure, including its causes.
Personnel and aircraft that have certificates of failure attached will not be
permitted to operate unless the state whose territory they are entering grants
authorization, which is at the state's discretion.
Founding Principles Of Chicago Convention
The Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation was approved on December
7, 1944, and it entered into force on April 4, 1947. It is an international pact
"on certain principles and practises to ensure that international civil aviation
may develop in a safe and orderly manner and that international air transport
services may be established on the basis of equality of opportunity and run
soundly and economically."
It established the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), an
intergovernmental organisation whose goals are to advance the planning and
growth of international air travel as well as the development of international
air navigational rules and procedures. ICAO ultimately became associated with
Article 1 of the Convention states that:
"The contracting States recognize that every State has complete and exclusive
sovereignty over the airspace above its territory."
This was a reiteration of language from the 1919 Paris Convention that was
similar. The complete and absolute sovereignty any state possesses over the air
space above its territory is acknowledged in this article. By virtue of its
reach, it would seem that the Convention tends to represent all states,
including non-contracting states.
It is emphasised by the words "total" and
"excusable" that there is no such thing as an innocent passage. Because of this,
there is no such thing as "freedom of the air" over a state's land; rather,
freedom only exists in the airspace over the high seas and EEZ.
The air above land areas and adjacent territorial seas over which a state
exercises sovereignty, suzerainty, protection, or mandate are included in the
lateral bounds of air territory, or "air space," as defined by Article 2 of the
Chicago Convention. The same article also defines territory in relation to
national territory as "exclusively land areas and territorial seas."
to Article 55 of the Law of the Sea Convention of 1982, territorial seas and the
Exclusive Economic Zone are two different things. Simply expressed, the region
of a state's territorial airspace over which it has exclusive sovereignty
correlates to the state's declared territorial sea breadth and clearly
delineated land borders.
Furthermore, the extent of a state's sovereignty over its internal airspace is
limited to the height of the space frontier. The phrase used in convention,
however, does not distinguish between national airspace and space.
Article 3 of the Chicago Convention, which covers both military and commercial
aircraft. However, neither the idea of state aircraft nor that of civil aircraft
are defined in Article 3. "Aircraft used in military, customs, and police
services shall be deemed to be state aircraft," states Article 3(b) of the
Convention. Since the word "deemed" is used, this is just an assumption rather
than a definition.
Both the nature of the enumeration and the nature of the
presumption must be accurately determined when interpreting Article 3(b). The
enumeration would not be exhaustive but rather serve as an illustration of what
would be regarded as a state aircraft under a liberal interpretation of Article
Such an interpretation would result in a smaller exemption and a wider range of
the Chicago regulatory system's applicability.
The states' non-scheduled airline rights to fly through or stop continuously
without requesting permission are confirmed under Article 5 of the 1944 Chicago
Convention. However, article 6 requires that prior to providing scheduled air
service, states get consent from the contracting state. Additionally, in order
to fulfil the sovereignty concept24, Article 7 of the 1944 Chicago Convention
specifies cabotage as a practise component of the Chicago Convention.
to this article, any contracting nation is free to reject the licence that is
granted to flyers, shippers, and letter carriers in exchange for money or as a
rental from one place to another. All current international civil aviation
systems are founded on Article 1 of the 1944 Chicago Convention, as well as
Articles 5, 6, and 7.
States have the authority to restrict or prevent overflight over specific
regions of their territory in accordance with Article 9(a) of the Chicago
Convention. The foundation of the Convention and one of its most powerful
expressions is the idea of sovereignty, which is the basis of this clause.
However, in order to be able to employ the power granted by Article 9(a) to
construct limited zones, a number of requirements and legal requirements must be
met. According to the language of the law, "no-fly zones" may only be
established for the following purposes:
- military necessity; or
- public safety.
Such "no-fly zones" must also adhere to geographical and temporal constraints
and be acceptable and proportionate. Furthermore, if a state wants to impose
restrictions on who can use its airspace, it must do so in a way that "does not
unreasonably interfere with air navigation." This demonstrates that while safety
is the first priority, the threat must be taken into account while applying the
sovereignty concept to defend airspace.
Current Challenges Of Maintaining "Air Sovereignty" Of State
The question of how much a state can claim sovereignty over airspace still rules
the international community today, despite all the improvements made in the
global aviation sector and all the laws enacted to establish air sovereignty,
from the Police Directive of 1784 to the Chicago Convention of 1944.
majority of aviation sovereignty's difficulties, including the legal, political,
economic, and national security ones, do, of course, exist in theoretical
contexts. As a result, the scope of this study is restricted to examining the
legal and national security difficulties that states encounter while
establishing air sovereignty under the current system of aviation law.
Agreement on the terms "airspace" and "aircraft" is subject to legal challenges.
The absence of a legal consensus on the terms "airspace" and "aircraft" has led
to a multitude of legal interpretations that are based on the various interests
of each state. The author gives his analyses and viewpoints in light of these
worries, which are basically as follows:
Problem Concerning The Determination Of "Airspace" Under State Sovereignty
The Chicago Convention of 1944 in particular has drawn attention to the fact
that it never defines what the phrase "airspace" means. Furthermore, neither the
definition of outer space nor its origin are mentioned in the 1967 Space Treaty,
which regulates space use. However, as stated in Article I of the Chicago
Convention, each state has total and exclusive authority over the airspace over
We mistakenly believe that the boundary between space and airspace
is present as a result. The main cause of the difficulties in establishing a
state's vertical sovereignty is the lack of a natural boundary separating space
from the air. This is comparable to how "international seas" and "territorial
waters" of a state are not physically separated from one another.
As a result,
it may be argued that Article 1 of the Chicago Convention conveys entire state
sovereignty over airspace only as far as flying by conventional aircraft and
balloons is practical. There isn't yet a firm international consensus over what
qualifies as "air space." States' domestic laws now include mention of the line
separating Earth and space as a result. Such unilateral delimitations inevitably
lead to ambiguity in the law and fragmentation.
For instance, the 2014 downing
of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-7 over Eastern Ukraine brought to light a touchy
issue involving aerial sovereignty and the extent of airspace. When the
passenger airliner was shot down over the Ukraine's conflict zone, it was en
route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.
Up to a height of roughly 9,750 metres,
Ukraine had closed off its airspace. The MH7 was flying in the higher airspace
at a height of roughly 10,000 metres, and the Ukrainian authorities said that
they had not received any new alerts about potential threats. The fact that this
was insufficient led to the death of all 298 people.
The States must ensure the
safety of the airspace over their territory, according to the joint
investigation team (JIT) led by the Netherlands. It would be challenging to
offer such a promise if there was hostilities on the area. The occurrence made
the national sovereignty over airspace's protection component more difficult to
Where airspace ends and what, as the domain of all humanity, begins
is the main issue in airspace delimitation. To ascertain which actions are
actually interpreted as determining air sovereignty rights, the answer to this
question is crucial.
National Security Challenge-Use Of Force Restriction
On September 1, 1983, a passenger jet operated by Korean Air Lines (KE007)
violated Soviet airspace and was shot down by the Soviet Union (now Russia). The
civilian aircraft was thought to be an American intelligence plane on a
reconnaissance fly over the Kamchatka peninsula. All 269 people on board the
target was killed when Soviet fighter planes destroyed it.
authorities claimed they used force in self-defence in accordance with their
national law; nevertheless, the inquiry found that the Soviet interceptors did
not adhere to ICAO rules and recommended practises prior to striking KE007.35As
a result, there is a conflict between the state's air sovereignty and the safety
of civil aviation.
After the incident, Article 3 of the Chicago Convention was adopted, which
forbids countries from using force against civilian aircraft. However, it only
applies to civilian aircraft that are "in flight."
Article 3 (a) declares the following:
"The contracting States recognize that every State must (a) refrain from
resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight and that, in
case of interception, the lives of persons on board and the safety of aircraft
must not be endangered. This provision shall not be interpreted as modifying in
any way the rights and obligations of States set forth in the Charter of the
The requirement that governments in the international community abide by
international standards for safeguarding and protecting the safety of civil
aircraft of other nationals while in their state's sovereign airspace. Indeed,
it is against the law to use weapons on a civil aeroplane, according to
customary law. Even while Article 3 is the first clause to explicitly state what
can be done in the event of an incursion, it just states what has long been
known and recognised.
The lengthy and rather awkward paragraphs (b) to (d) of Article 3 express the
idea that a proportionate response by the violating state against a serious
threat or serious violation shall be permitted in order to reclaim sovereignty
over the skies.
Since there is such a high chance of fatalities if the rules in the article are
not followed, the offended state should be discouraged from employing force
against the aircraft.
In a later case, Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America (USA),
which was determined by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), this
difficulty was encountered.38 In 1988, the USS Vincennes of the American
military shot down an Iranian Airbus A-300B that was flying from Dubai to Iran.
All 290 passengers, including the crew, perished. The US commanders erred in
thinking the aircraft was a military aircraft.
In a lawsuit brought before the ICJ, Iran alleged that the USA violated the Chicago Convention and the Montreal
Convention of 1971 by shooting down the aircraft. The matter was resolved and
dismissed before to the start of oral hearings, despite the fact that written
pleadings on preliminary objections were filed.
The USA then extended ex-gratia offer of compensation to the victims' families.
The ICJ hearings and ICAO investigation have proven that this occurrence
constituted a flagrant violation of Article 3 of the Chicago Convention. As a
result, this shows that even if the Chicago Convention's essential introductory
Article 1 recognises the notion of total air sovereignty, governments have still
actively used their sovereign rights. As a result, states seem to adopt a very
strict attitude against allowing foreign incursion when it comes to airspace
Invading aircraft over their territory are occasionally seen as an act of
aggression, provoking a response from the violated state. In many cases, the
penetrated state has led to the downing of such aircraft, igniting the need for
a line to separate civilian and military aircraft in the eyes of the
international community. Article 3 of the same convention's article 3 is
completely irrelevant in this situation.
The state was thought to have legal rights to the airspace over its territory as
early as the Roman Empire. More traditional ideas of a state's sovereign control
over its territorial airspace have emerged since the turn of the 20th century as
the global air transportation market has expanded.
A static view of air
sovereignty is envisioned by the ratification of the Chicago Convention on
December 7, 1944, which becomes the Magna Carta of civil aviation participation.
Aircraft that enter that area without authorization are regarded as intruders
under the current system of airspace sovereignty, which grants each state
exclusive rights over its own airspace.
Although air sovereignty is still a
concept and has formal requirements, its implementation and interpretation have
changed, restricting the powers of governments. Aerial sovereignty is not as
full and exclusive today as it was when the Chicago Convention was drafted,
according to this analysis. Even more significant, the Convention does not
define the term "aircraft" in legal terms. It doesn't even define "airspace."
The Chicago Convention was unable to create a clear legal system since its main
focus was on issues of aviation sovereignty. It only laid the groundwork for how
states set the rules for intercontinental travel, empowering each country to
choose its own aviation industry rules at whim. It has becoming harder to retain
air sovereignty while balancing safety and security as a result of these
inadequacies in key air legislation.
Additionally, in the current environment,
national security and economic concerns have largely influenced judgements about
international air sovereignty. Notably, rather than sustaining air sovereignty
today, the employment of lawful action in self-defences against intruders has
resulted in disastrous experiences rather than constructive outcomes.
The Chicago Convention, which was signed in 1944 and established the guiding
principles and structure for the management of international airspace, was an
important turning point in the history of international aviation. As global
geopolitics, technology, and the nature of air travel have changed over time, so
too have the interpretation and application of its provisions. In light of the
Chicago Convention and its consequences for modern aviation, this critical
analysis tries to outline the development of sovereignty in international
The Chicago Convention initially affirmed a state's sovereign right to govern
and exercise jurisdiction over the airspace within its borders. However, the
treaty established the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to
promote standardisation and harmonisation of civil aviation legislation among
states, recognising the necessity for global collaboration and uniformity in air
travel. This signalled a shift away from absolute sovereignty towards a more
cooperative and collaborative strategy that placed an emphasis on common
interests and win-win outcomes.
The acknowledgment of the innocent passage principle in airspace, which is
similar to the maritime principle established by the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), was one of the most important breakthroughs.
governments decided to compromise between their need for unrestricted
international air travel and their territorial sovereignty by allowing other
governments' planes to fly over their territory without landing as long as
certain requirements were met.
However, due to technological improvements, particularly the development of
satellites and the growing significance of space in contemporary aviation, the
idea of sovereignty over airspace remained a complex subject. States started
claiming sovereignty over the airspace above their exclusive economic zones,
expanding the scope of their legal authority.
Due to the blurring of traditional
lines caused by this extension of sovereignty, the Chicago Convention has to be
reassessed and reinterpreted in order to take into account the changing dynamics
of airspace utilisation.
The conventional understanding of airspace sovereignty has also been challenged
by the proliferation of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or drones. Drone
proliferation and their numerous applications, from commercial to recreational
uses, were not initially anticipated by the Chicago Convention. As a result, it
became urgent to address the regulation of drones and their incorporation into
airspace management, which called for modifications and adaptations to the
convention to account for these developing technologies.
The idea of sovereignty in international airspace has become more difficult in
the modern setting due to talks about space governance and the potential
militarization of space.
The scope of a state's sovereignty over the space above its territory and any
potential overlap with the field of space law have come under scrutiny as space
technologies become more integrated with aviation.
The Chicago Convention, which supported global collaboration and standardisation
while reaffirming states' sovereignty over their territorial airspace, set the
groundwork for the regulation of international airspace. But as the world of
aviation, technology, and space has developed, it has put old ideas of
sovereignty into question, forcing continual reinterpretations and adaptations
of the convention to deal with modern problems.
A crucial requirement for
ensuring the efficient control of international airspace continues to be
striking a balance between national interests, international collaboration, and
- Ruwantissa Abeyratne, "Convention on International Civil Aviation: A commentary," (Springer 2014)
- Stepen M. Shrewsbury, 'September 11th and The Single European Sky: Developing Concepts of Airspace Sovereignty,  68 Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 115
- Gbenga Oduntan "Sovereignty and Jurisdiction in Airspace and Outer Space" (Routledge 2011) 68-72
Award Winning Article Is Written By: Ms.Anushka Thakur
Authentication No: DE370409505389-4-1223