The International Court of Justice confirmed Friday, known reality: Israel’s occupation of Palestine and its apartheid policies towards Palestinians are illegal.
The UN International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday declared that Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory “is unlawful”, and that “all States are under an obligation not to recognize” the decades-long occupation.
The case in question was triggered by a request from the UN General Assembly (UNGA) on December 30, 2022, when a majority of United Nations members voted to seek the ICJ’s opinion on the legal consequences of the ongoing Israeli occupation of Palestine.
Paragraph 18 of the UNGA resolution requests the International Court of Justice to render an advisory opinion on the following questions:
- (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 (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?
The ruling issued today reads as a terse response to this UN General Assembly request that the ICJ look at the ‘Situation in Palestine’.
The findings are “the concern of all States”
“This decision could and should result in a further isolation of Israel,” says Simon Baldock, a security analyst based in Tel Aviv.
“I have read the 80 pages and watched and listened to the Court’s decision and just like the Netanyahu government has ignored all of the binding rulings of this ICJ, it will ignore this advisory ruling and manipulate the Biden Administration into some kind of ridiculous statement favouring Israel against the Palestinians and rest of the world.
“I find the language of the decision sanguine about prospects for the Palestinians. On average Palestinians, mostly women and children, are being murdered at the rate of 60-to-90 per day based on media reports but that is a light estimate because media is generally banned from Gaza unless escorted and controlled by Israel forces which kills other journalists and even their families in Gaza, over 100 so far,” added Mr. Baldock
Concerning the prohibition of acquiring territory by force, the International Court of Justice acknowledged that the Security Council has consistently stated that such acquisition in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is not permissible [paraphrased in non-legalese], said the ICJ in a lengthy oral and written statement.
“Any actions taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic makeup, institutional structure, or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any portion thereof, are not legally valid,” according to Security Council resolution 465 (1980).
Legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem – Full Text
Israel’s “continuing violation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” and “its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967” are illegal and must cease says the International Court of Justice in an 80-page advisory decision as requested by the UN General Assembly via the UN Secretary General.
Israel denies right to self-determination of Palestinians
ICJ Document: ICJ-Israel-186-20240719-adv-01-00-en
Page -73-
267. With regard to the Court’s finding that Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is illegal, the Court considers that such presence constitutes a wrongful act entailing its international responsibility. It is a wrongful act of a continuing character which has been brought about by Israel’s violations, through its policies and practices, of the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. Consequently, Israel has an obligation to bring an end to its presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible. As the Court affirmed in its Wall Advisory Opinion, the obligation of a State responsible for an internationally wrongful act to put an end to that act is well established in general international law, and the Court has on a number of occasions confirmed the existence of that obligation (Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2019 (I), p. 139, para. 178; Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004 (I), p. 197, para. 150).
268. The Court further observes that, with respect to the policies and practices of Israel referred to in question (a) which were found to be unlawful, Israel has an obligation to put an end to those unlawful acts. In this respect, Israel must immediately cease all new settlement activity. Israel also has an obligation to repeal all legislation and measures creating or maintaining the unlawful situation, including those which discriminate against the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as well as all measures aimed at modifying the demographic composition of any parts of the territory.
269. Israel is also under an obligation to provide full reparation for the damage caused by its internationally wrongful acts to all natural or legal persons concerned (see Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004 (I), p. 198, para. 152). The Court recalls that the essential principle is that “reparation must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and reestablish the situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not been committed” (Factory at Chorzów, Merits, Judgment No. 13, 1928, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 17, p. 47). Reparation includes restitution, compensation and/or satisfaction.
Page – 74 –
270. Restitution includes Israel’s obligation to return the land and other immovable property, as well as all assets seized from any natural or legal person since its occupation started in 1967, and all cultural property and assets taken from Palestinians and Palestinian institutions, including archives and documents. It also requires the evacuation of all settlers from existing settlements and the dismantling of the parts of the wall constructed by Israel that are situated in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as well as allowing all Palestinians displaced during the occupation to return to their original place of residence.
271. In the event that such restitution should prove to be materially impossible, Israel has an obligation to compensate, in accordance with the applicable rules of international law, all natural or legal persons, and populations, where that may be the case, having suffered any form of material damage as a result of Israel’s wrongful acts under the occupation.
272. The Court emphasizes that the obligations flowing from Israel’s internationally wrongful acts do not release it from its continuing duty to perform the international obligations which its conduct is in breach of. Specifically, Israel remains bound to comply with its obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and its obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law (see Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004 (I), p. 197, para. 149).