United Nations’ Highest Court Opens Hearings Into Legality of Israel’s Occupation
The Hague, Netherlands
The United Nations’ highest court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), commenced landmark hearings today regarding the legality of Israel’s 57-year occupation of territories sought for a Palestinian state. The hearings, scheduled to take place over six days, bring attention to the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and incorporate an extensive number of participating countries. Notably, Israel’s ongoing assault on Gaza looms in the background.
Focus on Israel’s Occupation
The hearings aim to specifically address Israel’s open-ended occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. Palestinian representatives, leading the proceedings, argue that Israel’s occupation violates key tenets of international law. They assert that Israel’s annexation of significant portions of the occupied land breaches the prohibition on territorial conquest. Further, they contend that Israel’s occupation infringes on the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and establishes a system of racial discrimination and apartheid.
Omar Awadallah, head of the U.N. organizations department in the Palestinian Foreign Ministry, expressed the hope for a groundbreaking court decision: “We want to hear new words from the court. They’ve had to consider the word genocide in the South Africa case. Now we want them to consider apartheid.”
Potential Impacts
An advisory opinion from the ICJ, expected to be delivered following months of deliberation, could have significant repercussions. Though not legally binding, the decision could profoundly impact international jurisprudence, influence international aid to Israel, and shape public opinion. Yuval Shany, a law professor at Hebrew University, noted that the case will confront Israel with multifaceted accusations while the international environment remains highly polarized.
Israel will likely defend the ongoing occupation on security grounds, potentially referring to the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas-led militants, which killed 1,200 people and brought attention to security risks. However, Palestinians and leading rights groups contend that the occupation extends beyond defensive measures, claiming that Israel has established an apartheid system that diminishes the status of Palestinians and promotes Jewish hegemony in the region.
A Global Dispute at the Court
The case before the ICJ originated when, in December 2022, the U.N. General Assembly requested a non-binding advisory opinion on this enduring and complex dispute. The Assembly’s decision brought overwhelming support, with opposition from Israel and more than 50 countries choosing to abstain.
The court’s involvement with Israeli policies and disputed occupations is not unprecedented. In 2004, the ICJ ruled, “contrary to international law,” that a separation barrier constructed by Israel in East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank had to cease. However, Israel chose to overlook the ruling.
Anticipated Stands
Following the Palestinian presentation, the panel of judges, seated in the wood-paneled Great Hall of Justice, will also hear from 51 countries and three organizations: the League of Arab States, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the African Union. South African representatives will express their views on Tuesday, with the African National Congress often comparing Israel’s policies to the apartheid regime that governed South Africa until 1994.
Israelite territories, comprising of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, were captured during the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians aspire to have these areas form the foundation of their independent state. The West Bank, home to 146 Israeli settlements and over 500,000 Jewish settlers, represents an ongoing point of contention. Additionally, Israel has annexed East Jerusalem and considers the entirety of the city its capital, further hindering Palestinian residents in the city.
The international community predominantly views Israeli settlements as illegal, and recognition of Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem remains absent.
Continuing Israel’s Justification
Israeli authorities, albeit not scheduling any spoken remarks during the hearings, may submit a written statement to the ICJ. Shany anticipates Israel justifying the occupation through security concerns, particularly the absence of a peace deal and the unforeseen security risks of withdrawing, as exemplified by the 2022 attack.
The ICJ’s final advisory opinion may play a pivotal role in shaping international perceptions and understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As the hearings progress, their outcome is likely to spark intense debate worldwide.
For the latest updates, visit https://apnews.com/hub/israel-hamas-war.
