ADVISORY OPINION
in respect of
“THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES ARISING FROM THE POLICIES AND PRACTICES OF ISRAEL IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY, INCLUDING EAST JERUSALEM”
What is happening?
– The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been asked by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) to give an opinion about Israel’s “policies and practices” in the “occupied Palestinian territory” – ie. East Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza
– About 55 countries and three international organizations are involved – the majority of them hostile towards the existence and security of the Jewish State of Israel
– Public hearings will be held – from Monday 19th to Monday 26th of February 2024 – at the Peace Palace in the Hague, the seat of the Court.
– It’s the first time since the Wall Advisory Opinion in 2004 that the Court will possibly give an opinion about the legal aspects of the so-called “occupied Palestinian territory”.
– Although the Court’s Advisory Opinion is not legally binding, an Opinion declaring Israel’s occupation to be illegal will be highly influential and potentially be used to compel Israel to withdraw unilaterally from Judea, Samaria, (East) Jerusalem and Gaza.
What is the ICJ being asked to give an opinion about?
– On 30 December 2022, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted resolution A/RES/77/247 in which, referring to Article 65 of the Statute of the Court, it requested the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion (Press Release of 9 February 2024):
– The relevant part of the resolution reads as follows:
“request the International Court of Justice, pursuant to Article 65 of the Statute of the Court, to render an advisory opinion on the following questions, considering the rules and principles of international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, relevant resolutions of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council, and the advisory opinion of the Court of 9 July 2004:
(a) What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures?
(b) How do the policies and practices of Israel referred to in paragraph 18 (a) above affect the legal status of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all States and the United Nations from this status?”
Why is this important?
– The Palestinian political leadership (ie. the PLO) is promoting and pushing this process. It is part of their well-known strategy (for the past decades) to utilize the international institutions in order to avoid negotations, and achieve a Palestinian State without conditions
– This is problematic because it ignores/overrides Israel’s legitimate security concerns, as well as Israel’s legitimate claims to sovereignty over the “occupied” territories
– The UNGA resolution requesting the Court to give an opinion was adopted by a minority of UN member states (only 88 states voted in favor of the resolution, and many states opposed it). So, it is a minority of States who are supporting this agenda.
– Most of the 55 countries and non-governmental organizations (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, League of Arab States and African Union) who are participating in the legal proceedings in the Hague deny that the Jewish State of Israel is a legitimate UN member state
– The ICJ has to decide whether it has “jurisdication” in this case, and also can decide to exercise its “discretion” not to issue a Advisory Opinion.
– It is expected that a small number of states will argue that the Court should recognize and respect the negotiated peace process, and not issue an Opinion.
What are the “legal consequences” that can be recognized in the Court’s opinion?
– It is conceivavble that the Court could decide that the consequences of Israel’s “policies and practices” are that the occupation is illegal
– It is also possible that the Court will decide not to issue an Opinion on the question asked by the UNGA
thinc. is involved
thinc. is assisting one of the UN member states that is actively involved in the proceedings at the ICJ. We will be in the Peace Palace throughout the oral proceedings next week, and reporting on the developments as they happen.
Stay connected with our website and social media channels for comprehensive coverage and updates on the hearings and upcoming legal developments that thinc. will deliver with an insightful perspective.
FOLLOW @ThincIsrael on: Instagram, Facebook, X, LinkedIn and YouTube.
