UN Court to assess repercussions of Israeli occupation

By Al Mayadeen English
Source: Agencies
18 Feb 2024 08:25
1 Shares

An unprecedented 52 nations, including major players like the United States, Russia, and China, are anticipated to present evidence during this week-long session at the Peace Palace in The Hague, home to the ICJ.

A Palestinian carries a child killed in an Israeli strike in Deir el-Balah, the Gaza Strip, Monday, October 23, 2023. (AP)

The highest court of the United Nations is set to commence hearings, on Monday, regarding the legal implications of "Israel's" occupation of the Palestinian territories since 1967. This historic event is anticipated to involve testimony from an unprecedented 52 nations.

Countries such as the United States, Russia, and China are scheduled to present their statements to the judges during a week-long gathering at the Peace Palace in The Hague, which serves as the home of the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

In December 2022, the UN General Assembly requested a non-binding "advisory opinion" from the ICJ regarding the "legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem."

Although any opinion issued by the ICJ would not carry legal force, it comes at a time when "Israel" faces increasing international legal scrutiny in the aftermath of its genocidal war against Palestinians in Gaza.

The hearings are distinct from a prominent case initiated by South Africa, directing "Israel" to cease all actions and rhetoric amounting to violations of the Genocide Convention,

In January, the ICJ issued a ruling in that case, stating that "Israel" must take all necessary measures to prevent genocide and permit humanitarian aid into Gaza. However, the court did not mandate a ceasefire.

On Friday, the ICJ dismissed South Africa's attempt to impose additional measures on "Israel", but reiterated the importance of implementing the ruling in its entirety.

What are the two inquiries?

The General Assembly has tasked the ICJ with addressing two inquiries.

Firstly, the court is to assess the legal ramifications of "the continuous infringement by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination."

This pertains to the "persistent occupation, settlement, and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967," and "actions aimed at changing the demographic composition, character, and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem."

The ICJ has also been tasked with examining the outcomes of what it characterized as "Israel's" "implementation of discriminatory legislation and measures related to it."

Secondly, the ICJ is expected to provide guidance on how Israeli actions impact the legal status of the occupation and what implications arise for the UN and other nations.

The court will deliver its judgment on the matter "expeditiously," likely, by the conclusion of the year.

While the International Court of Justice (ICJ) typically delivers binding judgments in state disputes, its rulings lack robust enforcement mechanisms. Notably, in the current case regarding Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, the ICJ's advisory opinion will be non-binding.

As per the court's own statement: "The requesting organ, agency or organization remains free to give effect to the opinion by any means open to it, or not to do so."

However, advisory opinions from the ICJ are generally heeded.

Previous advisory opinions

The ICJ has rendered advisory opinions on various issues, such as the legality of Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia and apartheid South Africa's occupation of Namibia. In 2004, the court declared parts of the separation wall constructed by "Israel" in the occupied Palestinian territory as illegal and recommended their removal.

Unsurprisingly, "Israel" has opted not to take part in the hearings, and expressed strong dissatisfaction with the UN request in 2022. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu labeled it as "despicable" and "disgraceful."

In response to the UN resolution the following week, "Israel" implemented a set of sanctions against the Palestinian Authority, intending to make it "pay the price" for its advocacy.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) emphasized that although advisory opinions lack binding force, they can hold significant moral and legal influence and may eventually become part of international law.

Clive Baldwin, Senior Legal Adviser at HRW, asserted that the hearings should shed light on the serious abuses perpetrated by Israeli authorities against Palestinians, including crimes against humanity such as apartheid and persecution.