The UN’s top court has ruled that Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are in breach of international law, and that Israel’s occupation of those territories amounts to long-term annexation which has undermined the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.
These were the main findings of a non-binding advisory opinion issued by the court on Friday calling on Israel to evacuate those settlements, to remove any portions of its so-called security wall built on contested land, to cease further expansion and to compensate those affected.
On foot of its landmark ruling the president of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), judge Nawaf Salam, called on the UN’s General Assembly and Security Council to consider the “precise modalities” by which Israel’s “illegal presence” would end as soon as possible.
Its “unlawful policies and prolonged discriminatory practices”, the judge said at the end of delivering the opinion, were “in breach of the Israeli government’s obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination”.
Netanyahu arrest warrant sparks outrage in Israel
ICC issues arrest warrants for Binyamin Netanyahu and former Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant
ICC warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant need 125 countries to act as police force
Gaza: US vetoes United Nations Security Council resolution for ‘unconditional’ ceasefire
The request for the International Court of Justice advisory opinion came from the UN General Assembly in December 2022 when it adopted Resolution 77/247 which raised two key questions that formed the backbone of the court’s analysis and the basis of Friday’s judgment.
[ Mark Weiss in Jerusalem: Opinion will weaken global support for IsraelOpens in new window ]
The first was: “What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel 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 of its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures.”
The second was: “How do the policies and practices of Israel...affect the legal status of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all states and for the United Nations from this status.”
In response to that UN resolution 49 countries, including Ireland, presented their own individual arguments to the court’s judges about the legal ramifications of Israel’s actions in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Three international organisations – the African Union, the League of Arab States, and the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation – were also authorised to participate in the proceedings.
The 15 judges decided unanimously on Friday that they had jurisdiction to consider the issues raised in the questions, and by 14 to 1 that they could legitimately issue an opinion.
They found by 11 to 4 that Israel’s continued presence on occupied Palestinian lands was “unlawful” and by 11 to 4 that Israel was obliged to end that presence as rapidly as possible.
By 14 to1 the judges ordered Israel to cease all new settlement building and to evacuate all settlements on occupied Palestinian territory, and by 14 to 1 ordered Israel to make reparations to those affected.
As to the legal consequences for states, by 12 to 3 the judges said states were now obliged to recognise the legal circumstances arising from the illegal occupation. Also by 12 to 3 they said the same injunction applied to international organisations
Finally, by 12 to 3the judges said the UN General Assembly and the Security Council should immediately consider the “precise modalities” by which the occupation could end.
Israel did not take part in the oral hearings in February, but in a written submission described the two questions as “prejudicial” and “tendentious”.
Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu dismissed the opinion. “No opinion from The Hague, based on lies, will distort the historical truth. For the same reason the legality of settlements in all parts of our homeland cannot be disputed.”
Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin welcomed the ruling, saying it “largely confirms” the Government’s legal analysis, which was outlined in Ireland’s written and oral submissions to the court, that Israel’s settlement and related policies in the occupied territories amount to illegal annexation.
“Ireland’s core objective in making submissions in this case was to encourage the court to clarify the rights of the Palestinian people in international law. This is essential, both to counter increasing misinformation internationally on this point, as well as to ensure that these rights are fully respected in any future settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” he said.
“It is absolutely clear that there can be no just and lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without respect for international law. The court’s authoritative clarification of the legal consequences of Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is of fundamental importance in this context.”
