This is an issue that concerns the delegation of permission to overfly international aircraft. Airspace sovereignty remains the property of the state. In particular, each nation is restricted to a few nautical miles beyond which it cannot assert sovereignty over airspace. For example, in situations where the armed forces of a certain foreign country are present in an emergency situation in another country, problems which arise with the use of airspace. Due to this, a foreign aircraft, not included in the armed forces, shall be navigated by the United Nations to ensure that the case is attended. Additionally, the Secretary of the concerned body shall consult the Architectural and Barriers Compliance Board to ensure that the access is issued with the set regulation procedures. The administrators shall draft navigation plans and policies for the use of airspace by the armed forces attending to an emergency. To achieve a legal, commercial development in such cases, the administrator prescribes the air traffic rules. The navigator shall take into the protection of individuals, property and make an efficient use of the airspace. The airspace is not mistakenly intended for malicious use (Shrewsbury, 2003).
When armed forces of a foreign country are given access to the airspace use, militant groups may invade the other country. As this issue lies with the sovereignty of airspace and a country is liable for its dangers, it can be an issue in hindering developments in commercial, technological, and legal developments in the airspace (Shrewsbury, 2003). Another challenge lies with the prevention of collision between aircraft and other airborne objects. Designation of specific zones in the uses of airspace by the armed forces is the issue that needs attention. The military ought to be an exception as applies to the Sovereignty International Laws.
Shrewsbury, S. M. (2003). September 11th and the Single European Sky: Developing Concepts of Airspace Sovereignty. Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 68(115), 2-10.