Haroon Siddique
The Guardian / July 19, 2024
International court of justice says it should leave ‘as rapidly as possible’ and make full reparations for ‘wrongful acts’
The UN’s international court of justice (ICJ) has ordered Israel to end its occupation of the Palestinian territories “as rapidly as possible” and make full reparations for its “internationally wrongful acts” in a sweeping and damning advisory opinion that says the occupation violates international law.
In a historic, albeit non-binding, opinion, the court found multiple breaches of international law by Israel including activities that amounted to apartheid.
It will make sobering reading for Israel’s allies, with the court advising that other states are under an obligation not to recognize the occupation as lawful nor to aid or assist it.
Reading the court’s opinion on Friday, the president of the ICJ, Nawaf Salam, said: “The court considers that the violations by Israel of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force and of the Palestinian people’s 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’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful.”
The opinion was provided in response to a request from the UN general assembly in 2022. It precedes the Gaza conflict and is not directly linked to it but will add to the pressure on Israel – and its allies – to bring an end to its military offensive, in which it has killed more than 38,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza health ministry.
Israel’s military operation in Gaza, which began after the 7 October attacks in which Hamas-led militants killed almost 1,200 people and took 250 people hostage, is the subject of a separate case at the ICJ brought by South Africa, which accuses it of genocide in its response to the killings on Israeli soil.
Responding to the ICJ’s opinion on Friday, the office of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, welcomed the court’s decision as “historic” and a “victory for justice” and said Israel must be compelled to implement it. The Palestinian foreign minister, Riyad al-Maliki, called it a “watershed moment”.
But the office of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said in a statement: “The Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land – not in our eternal capital Jerusalem, nor in our ancestral heritage of Judea and Samaria [the occupied West Bank].
“No decision of lies in The Hague will distort this historical truth, and similarly, the legality of Israeli settlements in all parts of our homeland cannot be disputed.”
The UN secretary general, António Guterres, would promptly transmit the advisory opinion to the 193-member world body and “it is for the general assembly to decide how to proceed in the matter”, UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said.
The secretary general reiterated his call for Israel and the Palestinians to engage “on the long-delayed political path towards ending the occupation and resolving the conflict in line with international law, relevant UN resolutions and bilateral agreements”, the spokesperson said.
Breaches of international law identified by the court included:
- Forcible evictions, extensive house demolitions and restrictions on residence and movement.
- The transfer by Israel of settlers to the West Bank and East Jerusalem and maintenance of their presence.
- Its failure to prevent or to punish attacks by settlers.
- Restricting the access of the Palestinian population to water.
- Israel’s use of the natural resources in the occupied Palestinian territory.
- The extension of Israel’s law to the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The Hague court found Israel was in breach of article 3 of the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination (CERD), which says: “Parties particularly condemn racial segregation and apartheid and undertake to prevent, prohibit and eradicate all practices of this nature in territories under their jurisdiction.”
Salam said: “The court observes that Israel’s legislation and measures impose and serve to maintain a near-complete separation in the West Bank and East Jerusalem between the settler and Palestinian communities. For this reason, the court considers that Israel’s legislation and measures constitute a breach of article 3 of CERD.”
As well as ordering an end to the occupation as soon as possible, the court, which consists of 15 judges, said Israel must put an end to all unlawful acts, including ceasing all new settlement activity and repealing legislation that maintains the occupation, including that which discriminates against Palestinians or seeks to modify the demographic composition of any parts of the occupied territory.
Salam said reparations included restitution, compensation and/or satisfaction, defining the former as “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.”
He said where reparations were materially possible, compensation should be paid instead.
Israel did not participate in the proceedings, which featured arguments from an unprecedented 52 states, but it submitted a written argument in July last year, urging the ICJ to dismiss the request for an opinion. It said the questions put to the court were prejudiced and failed to “recognize Israel’s right and duty to protect its citizens”, address Israeli security concerns or acknowledge Israel-Palestinian agreements to negotiate issues, including “the permanent status of the territory, security arrangements, settlements, and borders”.
The court said it had taken account of Israel’s security concerns but they could not “override the principle of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force” and imposing restrictions on all Palestinians was “disproportionate”.
Israel’s foreign ministry rejected the opinion as “fundamentally wrong” and one-sided, and repeated its stance that a political settlement in the region could only be reached by negotiations.
Philippe Sands KC, who acted as counsel for Palestine in the proceedings, said: “This is as clear and far-reaching ruling as I have come across from this court.
“Its legal consequences are entirely without ambiguity, its political consequences far-reaching.
“Among the many practical consequences, the court has made clear its view, by an overwhelming majority, that the US and other embassies in Jerusalem are illegal and must be removed for international law to be respected.”
Israel captured the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in the 1967 June War. It has annexed East Jerusalem in a move that is not recognized internationally and considers the West Bank, to which it has moved people in settlements, to be disputed territory.
While it withdrew its military and settlements from Gaza in 2005, the ICJ said its continued control over the strip, which had increased since 7 October, meant it was still occupied along with East Jerusalem and the West Bank, together constituting the occupied Palestinian territory.
Haroon Siddique is the Guardian’s legal affairs correspondent
