Nobody, by the Outer Space treaty which all the space faring nations have signed, as well as most other nations, and all space faring nations except Iran have also ratified - then by Article IX, they are commited to "conduct exploration of them so as to avoid their harmful contamination"
There is no "get out clause" for private citizens, because it is the responsibility of their government to prevent them from doing this also.
To understand why that is acceptable, think of the analogy of quarantine laws. Nobody questions the right of governments to intefere to stop its citizens from, for instance, taking rats to a remote island that has vulnerable species in it. Well it's the same for Mars. It doesn't matter if you launch from another country or from a floating platform, your government is still responsible for making sure you don't contaminate Mars in a harmful way.
And - the more people involved, from different countries - if you are an international organization, or if you get your spacecraft from one country, launch from another, and astronauts come from all around the world - that just adds to the number of countries that have to be involved, by this treaty, in making sure you don't contaminate Mars.
To change this would require international agreement, it's not too likely that the treaty text could be changed, after so many countries have signed it. It's not easy to pass an international treaty. The Moon treaty for instance, a somewhat more restrictive treaty, focused mainly on the Moon, has few signatories, though - interestingly the Netherlands is one of them, meaning that Mars One is bound by the Moon treaty.
There could be agreement however that some particular form of contamination is "not harmful".
Harmful here is normally understood to include (but not restricted to) harmful to scientific experiments by other parties to the treaty. So if whatever you do interferes in any way with experiments being done, or planned, or hoped to be done by signatories of the treaty - then it is likely to count as harmful and not be permitted - and obviously - not going to get agreement from them that it is okay to go ahead.
There is no "get out clause" for private citizens, because it is the responsibility of their government to prevent them from doing this also.
To understand why that is acceptable, think of the analogy of quarantine laws. Nobody questions the right of governments to intefere to stop its citizens from, for instance, taking rats to a remote island that has vulnerable species in it. Well it's the same for Mars. It doesn't matter if you launch from another country or from a floating platform, your government is still responsible for making sure you don't contaminate Mars in a harmful way.
And - the more people involved, from different countries - if you are an international organization, or if you get your spacecraft from one country, launch from another, and astronauts come from all around the world - that just adds to the number of countries that have to be involved, by this treaty, in making sure you don't contaminate Mars.
Article IX
In the exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, States Parties to the Treaty shall be guided by the principle of co-operation and mutual assistance and shall conduct all their activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, with due regard to the corresponding interests of all other States Parties to the Treaty. States Parties to the Treaty shall pursue studies of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, and conduct exploration of them so as to avoid their harmful contamination and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of extraterrestrial matter and, where necessary, shall adopt appropriate measures for this purpose. If a State Party to the Treaty has reason to believe that an activity or experiment planned by it or its nationals in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, would cause potentially harmful interference with activities of other States Parties in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, it shall undertake appropriate international consultations before proceeding with any such activity or experiment. A State Party to the Treaty which has reason to believe that an activity or experiment planned by another State Party in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, would cause potentially harmful interference with activities in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, may request consultation concerning the activity or experiment.
Outer Space Treaty of 1967
To change this would require international agreement, it's not too likely that the treaty text could be changed, after so many countries have signed it. It's not easy to pass an international treaty. The Moon treaty for instance, a somewhat more restrictive treaty, focused mainly on the Moon, has few signatories, though - interestingly the Netherlands is one of them, meaning that Mars One is bound by the Moon treaty.
There could be agreement however that some particular form of contamination is "not harmful".
Harmful here is normally understood to include (but not restricted to) harmful to scientific experiments by other parties to the treaty. So if whatever you do interferes in any way with experiments being done, or planned, or hoped to be done by signatories of the treaty - then it is likely to count as harmful and not be permitted - and obviously - not going to get agreement from them that it is okay to go ahead.
About the Author
Robert Walker
Writer of articles on Mars and Space issues - Software Developer of Tune Smithy, Bounce Metronome etc.Studied at Wolfson College, Oxford
Lives in Isle of Mull
4.8m answer views110.3k this month
Top Writer2017, 2016, and 2015
Published WriterHuffPost, Slate, and 4 moreHuffPost, Slate, Forbes, Newsweek, Business Insider, and Science 2.0