Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 83 | Issue 1 Article 6 2018 Unmaking a National Space Legislation for India: Indigenizing Space Law Through the “Organic Science” of the Indian Space Program S. G. Sreejith O.P. Jindal Global University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Part of the Air and Space Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation S. G. Sreejith, Unmaking a National Space Legislation for India: Indigenizing Space Law Through the “Organic Science” of the Indian Space Program, 83 J. Air L. & Com. 109 (2018) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol83/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. UNMAKING A NATIONAL SPACE LEGISLATION FOR INDIA: INDIGENIZING SPACE LAW THROUGH THE “ORGANIC SCIENCE” OF THE INDIAN SPACE PROGRAM S.G. SREEJITH* ABSTRACT This article addresses, in a framework, the efforts to make na- tional space legislation for India. It identifies that such efforts are in a forgetfulness of the indigenous specialties of the Indian Space Program, particularly of its science which has India ad- vancing in space technology. All efforts in making a national space legislation have become an imitation of efforts elsewhere because of their absorption in the otherness of epistemologies foreign to the Indian self. The article recognizes that, for the continued success of India as a space faring nation, legislation or policy, as the case may be, needs to recover the indigeneity of the science of the Indian Space Program. Hence, this article builds a framework that can challenge the misguided ambitions of the advocates of national space legislation. It also includes an Indian narrative on human space exploration based on the na- tional experience of India on matters relating to space. The arti- cle also proposes means for India to continue to fare in space through a reimagined triad of science, legislation, and policy. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.................................. 110 * M.Phil. (JNU), LL.D. (University of Lapland), Associate Professor and Associate Dean (Academic Affairs), Executive Director, Center for International Legal Studies, Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University. The author thanks the participants of the “International Conference on Future Developments in Space Law,” West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata (May 10, 2016), for their comments on an earlier version of this article and also Sandeepa Bhat for the invitation to the conference. The author also thanks Sushant Chandra for his written comments on the afterword. 109 110 JOURNAL OF AIR LAW AND COMMERCE [83 II. THE VIOLENCE OF WESTERN SCIENCE: “THE-SCIENCE” AND “SUCH–AND–SUCH SCIENCES” ........................................ 112 III. “THE-SCIENCE” AS THE SCIENCE OF SPACE EXPLORATION ................................... 114 IV. INDIGENEITY OF THE SCIENCE OF THE INDIAN SPACE PROGRAM ....................... 119 V. “THE-SCIENCE” OF INTERNATIONAL SPACE LAW................................................ 126 VI. INDIGENIZING SPACE LAW: A NATIONAL SPACE LEGISLATION? ............................ 130 A. WORK THUS FAR: A FORGETFULNESS BETWEEN MODERNITY AND CLASSICISM .................... 130 B. REFRESHING THE WORK: TOWARD NEWER ACTIONS ........................................ 133 C. RESTORING INDIGENOUS GENEALOGY: THE ORGANIC-SCIENCE FORMULA FOR LAWMAKING ... 136 VII. CONCLUSION..................................... 139 VIII. MID-PUBLICATION AUTHOR UPDATE .......... 141 I. INTRODUCTION INCE THE INAUGURATION of the Indian Space Program S(ISP), the science on which it is based has a characteristic of “indigeneity” to it. “Indigenous science” is based on the cultural characteristic of a nation that results in a refusal to share areas colonized by mainstream Western science. The pioneers of In- dian space science such as Vikram Sarabhai and Satish Dhawan, and later A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, envisioned and practiced a space program for India based on scientific self-sufficiency through lo- calized advanced technology. Their down-to-earth approach de- fined space technology as a means for helping humanity in its collective self-becoming. They placed technology at the services of humanity, which contrasts starkly to the totalizing approach of Western science. However, does India’s current space policy properly mirror the indigeneity of India’s sciences? Or does it more closely resemble international space law (which is a West- ern artifact based on a war-and-peace framework) in abject re- jection to the high ideals of the ISP? Considerations like these cannot be overlooked—especially since India is currently fram- ing national space legislation. This article creates a comprehensive argument so that any fu- ture legal activity regarding national space legislation for India does not ignore the ontology of Indian space science. Part I ar- 2018] NATIONAL SPACE LEGISLATION FOR INDIA 111 gues that, amid many other scientific approaches, the Western science of the Cartesian-Newtonian model has eclipsed other sciences through its violent claims of superiority. It explains briefly how Western science became “the-science” by marginaliz- ing indigenous sciences. In Part II, this article argues that human space exploration is primarily based on “the-science” and that the violence of such is ingrained in the exploration and use of outer space, the moon, and other celestial bodies. In that advance, space science has developed a consciousness that alienates basic human values, and instead submits itself to the service of markets. Part III demonstrates how the science of the ISP differs funda- mentally from Western science. It explains that the indigeneity is a key characteristic of the ISP, and that it follows the ontologi- cal realities of the universe and the socioeconomic conditions of the people of India (as opposed to having the highly-politicized hegemonic worldview of the international space program). Lastly, this part provides a general Indian narrative of space ex- ploration through the works of Indian space scientists Vikram Sarabhai, Homi J. Bhabha, Satish Dhawan, and A.P.J. Abdul Kalam. In Part IV, the article delves further into international space law, and how it is a product of bipolar politics and consensual diplomacy, far off from the philosophy of the ISP. The science underlying international space law is the “big science” of politi- cal nationalism. In using big science, international space law has forged a tense forum for the once-Cold War combatants to flaunt power to one another. Part V deliberates national space legislation for India and its current efforts. Its primary objective is to analyze the ISP’s scien- tific uniqueness. It critically reviews the work done up until now—which is caught between a madness for modernity and the classicism of international law—and yields results that skew the ISP from its characteristic indigeneity. Therein, the article asks what is rarely asked—Why does India not have national space legisla- tion? Part V argues that the ISP was better off before, and that the current demand for national space legislation is based on misconceptions about the role of law. Finally, the article pro- vides some suggestions to nonetheless streamline national space legislation, if at all, to include the visions of the ISP, particularly, to sustain and protect the indigenous science as has always been before. In this scheme, it is the organic science of the ISP that becomes the paradigm for any possible renewal. 112 JOURNAL OF AIR LAW AND COMMERCE [83 II. THE VIOLENCE OF WESTERN SCIENCE: “THE- SCIENCE” AND “SUCH-AND-SUCH SCIENCES” The objectivity of science is largely undisputed. Further, little deliberation is given to the fact that scientific objectivity is se- cured by social concerns.1 Such a socialness of science instantly requires itself to consider human wellbeing in the world. Perhaps the socialness of science is a matter of conversation among the few scientists who take pleasure in self-infliction. But a certain few skeptics, who may be branded as “sinners of sci- ence,” have taken the absoluteness of science simply as a given, a self-referentiality. Hence, they search for science in cultural plu- ralities—science of “such-and-such” culture, science of such-and- such civilization. But then amid them the mighty Western sci- ence that has self-proclaimed itself as the-science, falsely singu- lar, yet totalizing (and colonizing) all such and such sciences. On that note, the “the-science” clean image of Western sci- ence claims that it has the means to find the truth. However, this assertion is only found by dominating other scientific ap- proaches that often toil in the name of human development. “The-science” thus instills in its users what Michel Serres calls, “the unbearable pride of a possessive and domineering science,” and an “arrogance” which is in contrast to a devoted enthusiasm to know the marvels of nature.2 This conceitedness of “the-sci- ence” makes it dangerous. In its assertion in what conveniently appeases power, “the-sci- ence” has espoused the means of violence. Its violent ways are hidden in its claims of standing for worldly peace (while it in fact forges a war-peace framework, which is in fact a peace- through-war analytic). In order to ensure human wellbeing, “the-science,” kills hundreds of thousands of “lesser animals”: frogs, rats, and pigs have bled on lab tables for human wellbe- ing.3 To promote human development on this planet, “the-sci- ence” has vandalized nature; trees, rivers, and mountains have been wiped out to give humans cozy habitats. Valleys, liveli- hoods, and downstream ecosystems have been destroyed for 1 See generally HELEN E. LONGINO,SCIENCE AS SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE: VALUES AND OBJECTIVITY IN SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY 3–14, 66–69 (1990). 2 See CATHERINE LARRERE` , Ethics, Politics, Science, and the Environment: Concerning the Natural Contract, in EARTH SUMMIT ETHICS: TOWARD A RECONSTRUCTIVE POSTMODERN PHILOSOPHY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 115, 120 (J.