{"id":270088,"date":"2024-07-22T12:02:05","date_gmt":"2024-07-22T11:02:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=270088"},"modified":"2024-07-22T06:14:30","modified_gmt":"2024-07-22T05:14:30","slug":"legal-consequences-of-the-policies-and-practices-of-israel-in-the-occupied-palestinian-territory-and-east-jerusalem","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2024\/07\/legal-consequences-of-the-policies-and-practices-of-israel-in-the-occupied-palestinian-territory-and-east-jerusalem\/","title":{"rendered":"Legal Consequences of the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and East Jerusalem"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_248204\" style=\"width: 410px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/ICJ-International-Court-of-Justice-The-Hague-Netherland.jpeg\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-248204\" class=\"wp-image-248204\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/ICJ-International-Court-of-Justice-The-Hague-Netherland-1024x768.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"400\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/ICJ-International-Court-of-Justice-The-Hague-Netherland-1024x768.jpeg 1024w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/ICJ-International-Court-of-Justice-The-Hague-Netherland-300x225.jpeg 300w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/ICJ-International-Court-of-Justice-The-Hague-Netherland-768x576.jpeg 768w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/ICJ-International-Court-of-Justice-The-Hague-Netherland.jpeg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 400px) 100vw, 400px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-248204\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">International Court of Justice in The Hague.<br \/>(R Boed, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)<\/p><\/div>\n<p><em>19 Jul 2024 &#8211;<\/em> The International Court of Justice has today given its Advisory Opinion in respect of the Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is recalled that, 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 on the following questions:<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>\u201c(a) What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the<br \/>\nright of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation,<br \/>\nsettlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including<br \/>\nmeasures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of<br \/>\nthe Holy City of Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related discriminatory<br \/>\nlegislation and measures?<\/p>\n<p>(b) How do the policies and practices of Israel referred to . . . above affect the legal<br \/>\nstatus of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all States<br \/>\nand the United Nations from this status?\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In its Advisory Opinion, the Court responds to the questions posed by the General Assembly<br \/>\nby concluding that:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>the State of Israel\u2019s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful;<\/li>\n<li>the State of Israel is under an obligation to bring to an end its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible;<\/li>\n<li>the State of Israel is under an obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities, and to evacuate all settlers from the Occupied Palestinian Territory;<\/li>\n<li>the State of Israel has the obligation to make reparation for the damage caused to all the natural or legal persons concerned in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div id=\"attachment_270095\" style=\"width: 560px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/gaza-israel-genocide-palestine-shutterstock_2486641403.webp\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-270095\" class=\"wp-image-270095\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/gaza-israel-genocide-palestine-shutterstock_2486641403.webp\" alt=\"\" width=\"550\" height=\"367\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/gaza-israel-genocide-palestine-shutterstock_2486641403.webp 640w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/gaza-israel-genocide-palestine-shutterstock_2486641403-300x200.webp 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 550px) 100vw, 550px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-270095\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Gaza Jul 2024 &#8211; shutterstock_2486641403<\/p><\/div>\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Reasoning of the Court<\/h3>\n<p>After concluding that it has jurisdiction to render the requested opinion and that there are no<br \/>\ncompelling reasons for it to decline to give an opinion (paras. 22-50), the Court recalls the general<br \/>\ncontext of the case (paras. 51-71) and addresses the scope and meaning of the two questions posed<br \/>\nby the General Assembly (paras. 72-83).<\/p>\n<p>The Court then assesses the conformity of Israel\u2019s policies and practices in the Occupied<br \/>\nPalestinian Territory, as identified in question (a), with its obligations under international law. In<br \/>\nparticular, the Court\u2019s analysis examines, in turn, the questions of the prolonged occupation, Israel\u2019s<br \/>\npolicy of settlement, the question of the annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967,<br \/>\nand Israel\u2019s adoption of related legislation and measures that are allegedly discriminatory<br \/>\n(paras. 103-243).<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the question of the prolonged occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory,<br \/>\nwhich has lasted for more than 57 years (paras. 104-110), the Court observes that, by virtue of its<br \/>\nstatus as an occupying Power, a State assumes a set of powers and duties with respect to the territory over which it exercises effective control. The nature and scope of these powers and duties are always premised on the same assumption: that occupation is a temporary situation to respond to military necessity, and it cannot transfer title of sovereignty to the occupying Power.<\/p>\n<p>In the Court\u2019s view, the fact that an occupation is prolonged does not in itself change its legal<br \/>\nstatus under international humanitarian law. Although premised on the temporary character of the<br \/>\noccupation, the law of occupation does not set temporal limits that would, as such, alter the legal<br \/>\nstatus of the occupation. Occupation consists of the exercise by a State of effective control in foreign<br \/>\nterritory. In order to be permissible, therefore, such exercise of effective control must at all times be<br \/>\nconsistent with the rules concerning the prohibition of the threat or use of force, including the<br \/>\nprohibition of territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force, as well as with the right to self\u2011determination. Therefore, the fact that an occupation is prolonged may have a bearing on the justification under international law of the occupying Power\u2019s continued presence in the occupied territory.<\/p>\n<p>As regards Israel\u2019s settlement policy (paras. 111-156), the Court reaffirms what it stated in its<br \/>\nAdvisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied<br \/>\nPalestinian Territory of 9 July 2004, that the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the r\u00e9gime associated with them, have been established and are being maintained in violation of international law. The Court notes with grave concern reports that Israel\u2019s settlement policy has been expanding since the Court\u2019s 2004 Advisory Opinion.<\/p>\n<p>As regards the question of the annexation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (paras. 157-179), it is the view of the Court that to seek to acquire sovereignty over an occupied territory, as shown by the policies and practices adopted by Israel in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, is contrary to the prohibition of the use of force in international relations and its corollary principle of the non-acquisition of territory by force.<\/p>\n<p>The Court then examines the question of the legal consequences arising from Israel\u2019s adoption<br \/>\nof related discriminatory legislation and measures (paras. 180-229). It concludes that a broad array<br \/>\nof legislation adopted and measures taken by Israel in its capacity as an occupying Power treat<br \/>\nPalestinians differently on grounds specified by international law. The Court notes that this<br \/>\ndifferentiation of treatment cannot be justified with reference to reasonable and objective criteria nor to a legitimate public aim. Accordingly, the Court is of the view that the r\u00e9gime of comprehensive restrictions imposed by Israel on Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory constitutes systemic discrimination based on, inter alia, race, religion or ethnic origin, in violation of Articles 2, paragraph 1, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 2,<br \/>\nparagraph 2, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Article 2<br \/>\nof the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.<\/p>\n<p>The Court then turns to the aspect of question (a) that enquires as to the effects of Israel\u2019s<br \/>\npolicies and practices on the exercise of the Palestinian people\u2019s right to self\u2011determination<br \/>\n(paras. 230-243). In this regard, the Court is of the view that, as a consequence of Israel\u2019s policies<br \/>\nand practices, which span decades, the Palestinian people has been deprived of its right to<br \/>\nself\u2011determination over a long period, and further prolongation of these policies and practices<br \/>\nundermines the exercise of this right in the future. For these reasons, the Court considers that Israel\u2019s unlawful policies and practices are in breach of Israel\u2019s obligation to respect the right of the<br \/>\nPalestinian people to self\u2011determination.<\/p>\n<p>Turning to the first part of question (b), the Court examines whether and, if so, how the policies<br \/>\nand practices of Israel have affected the legal status of the occupation in light of the relevant rules<br \/>\nand principles of international law (paras. 244-264).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, the Court first considers that the first part of question (b) is not whether the<br \/>\npolicies and practices of Israel affect the legal status of the occupation as such. Rather, the Court is<br \/>\nof the view that the scope of the first part of the second question concerns the manner in which<br \/>\nIsrael\u2019s policies and practices affect the legal status of the occupation, and thereby the legality of the<br \/>\ncontinued presence of Israel, as an occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. This<br \/>\nlegality is to be determined under the rules and principles of general international law, including<br \/>\nthose of the Charter of the United Nations.<\/p>\n<p>In this context, the Court is of the view that Israel\u2019s assertion of sovereignty and its annexation<br \/>\nof certain parts of the territory constitute a violation of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory<br \/>\nby force. This violation has a direct impact on the legality of Israel\u2019s continued presence, as an<br \/>\noccupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Court considers that Israel is not<br \/>\nentitled to sovereignty over or to exercise sovereign powers in any part of the Occupied Palestinian<br \/>\nTerritory on account of its occupation. Nor can Israel\u2019s security concerns override the principle of<br \/>\nthe prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force.<\/p>\n<p>The Court further observes that the effects of Israel\u2019s policies and practices, and its exercise<br \/>\nof sovereignty over certain parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, constitute an obstruction to<br \/>\nthe exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination. The effects of these policies<br \/>\nand practices include Israel\u2019s annexation of parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the<br \/>\nfragmentation of this territory, undermining its integrity, the deprivation of the Palestinian people of the enjoyment of the natural resources of the territory and its impairment of the Palestinian people\u2019s right to pursue its economic, social and cultural development.<\/p>\n<p>The Court is of the view that the above-described effects of Israel\u2019s policies and practices,<br \/>\nresulting, inter alia, in the prolonged deprivation of the Palestinian people of its right to<br \/>\nself-determination, constitute a breach of this fundamental right. This breach has a direct impact on<br \/>\nthe legality of Israel\u2019s presence, as an occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The<br \/>\nCourt is of the view that occupation cannot be used in such a manner as to leave indefinitely the<br \/>\noccupied population in a state of suspension and uncertainty, denying them their right to self-<br \/>\ndetermination while integrating parts of their territory into the occupying Power\u2019s own territory.<\/p>\n<p>In light of the foregoing, the Court turns to the examination of the legality of the continued<br \/>\npresence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (paras. 259-264).<\/p>\n<p>The Court considers that the violations by Israel of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory<br \/>\nby force and of the Palestinian people\u2019s right to self-determination have a direct impact on the legality of the continued presence of Israel, as an occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The sustained abuse by Israel of its position as an occupying Power, through annexation and an assertion of permanent control over the Occupied Palestinian Territory and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and renders Israel\u2019s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory unlawful.<\/p>\n<p>This illegality relates to the entirety of the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel in 1967.<br \/>\nThis is the territorial unit across which Israel has imposed policies and practices to fragment and<br \/>\nfrustrate the ability of the Palestinian people to exercise its right to self\u2011determination, and over large swathes of which it has extended Israeli sovereignty in violation of international law. The entirety of the Occupied Palestinian Territory is also the territory in relation to which the Palestinian people should be able to exercise its right to self-determination, the integrity of which must be respected.<\/p>\n<p>The Court has found that Israel\u2019s policies and practices referred to in question (a) are in breach<br \/>\nof international law. The maintenance of these policies and practices is an unlawful act of a<br \/>\ncontinuing character entailing Israel\u2019s international responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The Court has also found in reply to the first part of question (b) that the continued presence<br \/>\nof Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is illegal. The Court therefore addresses the legal<br \/>\nconsequences arising from Israel\u2019s policies and practices referred to in question (a) for Israel,<br \/>\ntogether with those arising from the illegality of Israel\u2019s continued presence in the Occupied<br \/>\nPalestinian Territory under question (b), for Israel, for other States and for the United Nations<br \/>\n(paras. 267-281).<\/p>\n<p>___________________________________________________<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/icj-logo.jpeg\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft wp-image-251559\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/icj-logo.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"100\" height=\"100\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/icj-logo.jpeg 186w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/icj-logo-150x150.jpeg 150w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 100px) 100vw, 100px\" \/><\/a><em>The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and began its activities in April 1946. <\/em><em>The Court is composed of 15 judges elected for a nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague <\/em><em>(Netherlands). The Court has a twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States; and, second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions <\/em><em>referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and agencies of the system.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/scheerpost.com\/2024\/07\/21\/icj-on-the-legal-consequences-arising-from-the-policies-and-practices-of-israel-in-the-occupied-palestinian-territory-including-east-jerusalem\/\" >Go to Original &#8211; scheerpost.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>19 Jul 2024 &#8211; The International Court of Justice has today given its Advisory<br \/>\nOpinion in respect of the Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in<br \/>\nthe Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":251559,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[82],"tags":[87,865,1644,88,2416,773,427,2417,124,1025],"class_list":["post-270088","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-united-nations","tag-gaza","tag-genocide","tag-international-court-of-justice-icj","tag-israel","tag-israeli-occupation","tag-jerusalem","tag-palestine","tag-palestine-israel-apartheid-wall","tag-united-nations","tag-west-bank"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/270088","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=270088"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/270088\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":270116,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/270088\/revisions\/270116"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/251559"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=270088"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=270088"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=270088"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}