Decisio Advisory’s Post

The ruling of the International Court of Justice on Israel's practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, issued in July 2024, forces the European Union to rethink its passive two-state policy, Senior Research Fellow Timo R. Stewart says in the latest FIIA Briefing Paper. 🔎 Stewart discusses the significance of the ICJ ruling for the Israel-Palestine conflict and the now non-existent Middle East Peace Process, also addressing the ruling's current standing among EU member states. While the Gaza war has shifted member states towards affirming Palestinian rights, divisions remain, precluding joint positions on the matter. The EU's basic choice lies between rallying to apply meaningful pressure on Israel in the face of member state divisions, or attempting to avoid the immediate political stalemate by playing for time, Stewart writes. However, the latter option risks jeopardizing the two-state solution itself, as well as the credibility of the EU’s commitment to international law. ➡ Read the full publication: https://lnkd.in/gPegx36Q #FIIApublication #ICJ #InternationalCourtofJustice #Israel #Palestine #EuropeanUnion #internationalaffairs #internationallaw

Sobering read. 🚨 New ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory 🚨 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a landmark advisory opinion addressing the legal consequences of Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. This opinion underscores the prolonged occupation, illegal settlement activities, de facto annexation, and discriminatory practices against Palestinians, all of which contravene international law. Key Highlights: 1. Prolonged Occupation: The occupation must benefit the local population and remain temporary. Israel’s extended control breaches international norms. 2. Settlement Policy: Settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem violate the Fourth Geneva Convention and alter the region’s demographics. 3. Annexation: De facto annexation of occupied territories defies the prohibition on acquiring territory by force. 4. Discrimination: Policies restricting movement, property demolition, and residence permits discriminate against Palestinians, violating human rights treaties. 5. Self-Determination: Israel’s actions impede Palestinian self-determination, a fundamental right under international law. Legal Consequences: • For Israel: Cease illegal activities, dismantle settlements, repeal discriminatory laws, and make reparations. • For Other States: Do not recognize the illegal situation; distinguish between Israeli and occupied territories in dealings. • For the UN: Continue addressing the legal status of the occupation and ensure compliance with international law. This advisory opinion, while non-binding, carries significant geopolitical implications. It reinforces international legal frameworks and highlights the need for a resolution that respects the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians. The global response will shape the future of peace efforts in the Middle East. 🌍 #Geopolitics #InternationalLaw #MiddleEast #ICJ #PeaceProcess #HumanRights #SelfDetermination

🙌The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Occupation of Palestinian Territories:🙌 Key Takeaways🙌 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has delivered a significant advisory opinion concerning Israel's occupation of the Palestinian Territory, declaring it illegal and mandating an end to this occupation. Key Conclusions: 1. Unlawful Occupation: Israel’s 57-year occupation of Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem, is illegal. 2. Immediate Actions Required: Israel must end its occupation and halt new settlement activities, evacuating all settlers. 3. Reparations: Israel is obligated to make reparations for damages caused to affected individuals. 4. Global Obligations:States and international organizations must not recognize or support the legality of the occupation. 5. Further UN Actions: The UNGA and UNSC should consider additional measures to end Israel’s occupation promptly. Issues Addressed: - The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. - The impact of Israel’s prolonged occupation and discriminatory policies. ICJ’s Observations: - Occupation should be temporary and cannot transfer sovereignty. - Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem violate international law. - Israel's annexation attempts are illegal under international law. - Discriminatory legislation by Israel against Palestinians violates multiple international conventions. - Israel's actions undermine Palestinians’ right to self-determination. Implications: - States and international bodies must act against the illegal occupation. - The UNGA and UNSC should take decisive steps to end the occupation. Dissenting Opinion: Vice President Julia Sebutinde expressed that while the ICJ had jurisdiction, it should have refrained from rendering the opinion to maintain judicial integrity. This landmark opinion reinforces the international legal stance against prolonged occupation and calls for immediate and concerted efforts to address the situation. #InternationalLaw #ICJ #Palestine #Israel #HumanRights #SelfDetermination #UN #GlobalJustice

For the second time in the last 20 years, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that Israel is violating international law in the occupied Palestinian Territories. In 2004, the ICJ ruled that Israel’s settlements and settlement wall in the West Bank violated international law. Today, the ICJ ruled that Israel has abused its status as the occupying power in the West Bank and east Jerusalem by carrying out policies of annexing territory, imposing permanent control and building settlements. It said such acts render “Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful” and that Israel’s continued presence was ”illegal” and should be ended as “rapidly as possible.” After the ICJ’s 2004 decision, Western governments imposed no consequences on Israel. On the contrary, despite their preposterous claims to be the guardians of the “rules-based order” (whatever that means), Western governments continued to arm and trade with the apartheid regime. As a consequence, Israel was emboldened to engage in even worse forms of criminality. It is now committing genocide with total impunity. Ultimate responsibility for these crimes rests with Western governments. Without their support, Israel could never get away with its barbarism and contempt for international law. #Israel #palestine

There is absolutely no future for Israel based on the narrative of its radicals..... anyone who wants to claim territory exclusively for themselves will only find eternal war, violence and destruction, whereas the moderates at both sides hold the key to peace by non-violent interaction and dialog as equals. This is the only path to replace fear and hatred by trust and solidarity and to solve the conflict forever. The only way out of the conflict is thus to learn to coexist as equals and to share the country as one union. There is in principle space for all (https://lnkd.in/dGTAtn6V, interesting data and interesting plan for the return of all displaced Palestinians). Practically, it means in my opinion to go back to the times of Canaan and establish (democratic) autonomous communities and spread them over the entire territory of Canaan. These autonomous communities can coexist and come together in two confederations of communities, an Israeli and a Palestinian one, sharing the country as a union. There is space for all cultural identities this way. Currently, such scenario seems very far fetched, but, the Israelis and Palestinians belong to Canaan and nobody outside is waiting for another exodus of any of the two. www.canaan.community & www.pax.ngo & www.convergence.ngo

This time feels different? Today's 80-page judgement by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) #ICJ (the supreme court of the UN system) states that "Israel’s unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" violates "the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people" and that "Israel has an obligation to put an end to those unlawful acts" and "an obligation to provide full reparation for the damage caused by its internationally wrongful acts to all natural or legal persons concerned" over the last 57 years of occupation. The ICJ has ruled against Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories before, but this feels different for two reasons: ➡  The judgement also makes crystal clear the obligations of all other countries: "In view of the character and importance of the rights and obligations involved, all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory." ➡  The timing, with the international community increasingly isolating Israel due to its conduct of the war in Gaza, and the court's assertion that international law applies regardless of the decades of failed political efforts to reach a lasting peace agreement: a clear rejection of the argument that the ICJ had no standing to consider the issue on the grounds that UN resolutions and bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements had established that the only valid framework for conflict resolution should be political, not legal. Does this open the way for sanctions now to be applied to Israeli ministers and institutions supporting continued occupation and settlements? Will it mean the closure of the US Embassy and other embassies in Jerusalem? https://lnkd.in/ei3sHsDa

It is trite to say that international law and respect for the rule of law are important. But word is cheap. Ultimately, what counts is action. In a recent ruling, the world's top court, the International Court of Justice, took a clear stand on Israel’s activities in Palestinian lands it has controlled since 1967. From the forced displacement and demolition of the homes of Palestinians, the building of settlements, the imposition of restrictions on the free movement of Palestinians, the annexation of large swathes of territory, and more, the ICJ ruled that Israeli conduct contravened international law. Alas, the ruling is non-binding and lacks enforcement power. Israel has also not faced sanctions or punitive actions from any of its allies, beyond nominal words of criticism, exposing the latter to charges of hypocrisy and double standards. If we want to see lasting and meaningful peace and justice in the Middle East, and the world writ large, meaningful actions must be taken to backstop and enforce international law. Taking a long-term enlightened approach, this is also the only feasible way to turn a loser in an international court judgment into a winner, as it too will reap the dividend that comes from peaceful development. #internationallaw #ruleoflaw #publicpolicy (Image: AFP via Getty Images)

Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has called for an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and urged governments worldwide to uphold international law. His comments on Friday were in response to an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) two weeks ago, which addressed Israel's presence in occupied Palestine. The ICJ found that Israel's decades-long occupation of Palestinian territories was "unlawful" and that its "near-complete separation" of people in the occupied West Bank breached international laws concerning "racial segregation" and "apartheid." "The ICJ makes definitively clear that Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territories is unlawful and needs to end as rapidly as possible," said Welby. He emphasized that in a world increasingly marked by violations of international law, governments must show an "unwavering commitment" to the ICJ's decisions. Welby's remarks highlight the urgent need for international action to address the Israeli occupation and ensure justice and peace for the Palestinian people. #IsraeliApartheid #IsraeliWarCrimes #IsraeliTerrorism #Accountability #InternationalCriminalCourt #HumanRightsViolation #InternationalCourtofJustice #GazaGenocide #StopFundingIsrael #PalestinianLivesMatter #FreedomofExpression #InternationalJustice #USIsrael #IsraelisTerroristState #GlobalPeaceSummit

The last few British Tory Governments repeatedly ignored, sought to diminish, and fought tooth & nail against both British and International law across a wide variety of policy areas. In their UK - Israel bilateral treaty of 21 March 2023 they formally committed the British State to side with Israel against the international community, specifically the United Nations and World Courts ICJ & ICC. Specifically to deny the mountain of independent evidence that Israel rules over the Palestinian people through an illegal & immoral system of apartheid, both inside Israel and the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories. Specifically with the purpose of promoting Israeli rights and thereby diminishing Palestinian rights to exist. Abhorrent policy and subsequent actions played out by the UK Government through abstaining from ceasefire votes at the UN Security Council, challenging ICC jurisdiction over the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories and the occupier Israel. All underpinned by full UK Government direct military, financial, intelligence and propaganda support to the genocidal Netanyahu regime and IOF war criminals. The key question of Sir Kid Starver's Keir Starmer entire Prime Ministership has already arrived through the ICJ non-binding advisory opinion. Will he now reverse the UK policy towards the illegally occupying Zionist entity formally known as the State of Israel? Will he tare up the UK - Israel bilateral treaty which has and continues to have a grave enabling consequence on the Gaza Genocide? Will he apologise for his failure to PROTECT the innocent Palestinian civilians from the GENOCIDE and wider Apartheid System persecution, by abstaining and / or his Labour Party voting against the proposed King's Speech Amendment 8 CEASEFIRE call of 15 November 2023? Noting the courageous and morally upstanding 58 Labour Members of Parliament who voted in accordance with their legal obligations for the immediate CEASEFIRE and release of hostages. Will he now acknowledge that it was wrongful for him personally to publicly support the genocidal Netanyahu regime siege of Gaza denying the Palestinian civilian population provision of water, electricity, food, and fuel? Will the British Prime Minister, an expert practitioner of the law, now demonstrate UK Government commitment to the Rule of Law on both domestic matters and international commitments? Or will he now show his true colours? https://lnkd.in/e9Y87HG2

Introducing the Symposium on south-Asian approaches to the question of Palestine's right of self-determination. In the next four days, Raas Nabeel, Mohd Imran, Quazi Omar Foysal and I will discuss Pakistan's, Maldives', Bangladesh's and China's submissions to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in the Advisory Opinion proceedings on the question of Israeli occupation of Palestine. As this Introduction notes, our primary aim is also to understand what is the stance of these nations on the Principle of Self-Determination. All the authors have taken a critical approach towards assessing each submission and the posts will not be self-congratulatory in nature. We hope that this Symposium can bring more awareness about the domestic and regional practices in international law and will invite further engagement with south-Asian practices of international law. First post by Raas Nabeel, assessing Pakistan's submission, will be live tomorrow (14 May 2024). Subscribe to the blog to read all the posts directly your inbox. https://lnkd.in/gMiC-S9n