THE United Nations’ highest court is set to open historic hearings into the legality of Israel’s 57-year occupation of lands sought for a Palestinian state, plunging the 15 international judges back into the heart of the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Six days of hearings are scheduled at the International Court of Justice from Monday, during which an unprecedented number of countries will participate, as Israel continues its devastating assault on Gaza.
Though the case occurs against the backdrop of the Israel-Hamas war, it focuses instead on Israel’s open-ended occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem.
Palestinian representatives, who speak first on Monday, will argue the Israeli occupation is illegal because it has violated three key tenets of international law, the Palestinian legal team has said.
They claim Israel has violated the prohibition on territorial conquest by annexing large swaths of occupied land, has violated the Palestinians’ right to self-determination, and has imposed a system of racial discrimination and apartheid.
READ MORE: Scots rage at ‘shocking’ Glasgow Airport drop off price hike
Omar Awadallah, the head of the UN organisations department in the Palestinian Foreign Ministry, said: “We want to hear new words from the court.
“They’ve had to consider the word genocide in the South Africa case,” he said, referring to a separate case before the court. “Now we want them to consider apartheid.”
Awadallah said an advisory opinion from the court “will give us many tools, using peaceful international law methods and tools, to confront the illegalities of the occupation”.
The court will likely take months to rule. But experts say the decision, though not legally binding, could profoundly impact international jurisprudence, international aid to Israel and public opinion.
Yuval Shany, a law professor at Hebrew University and a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, said: “The case will put before the court a litany of accusations and allegations and grievances which are probably going to be uncomfortable and embarrassing for Israel, given the war and the already very polarised international environment.”
READ MORE: SNP ceasefire motion can highlight 'utter failure' of UK on Gaza, expert says
Israel is not scheduled to speak during the hearings, but could submit a written statement. Shany said Israel will likely justify the ongoing occupation on security grounds, especially in the absence of a peace deal.
It is likely to point to the October 7 attack in which Hamas-led militants from Gaza killed 1139 people across southern Israel and dragged 250 hostages back to the territory.
“There is this narrative that territories from which Israel withdraws, like Gaza, can potentially transform into very serious security risks,” Shany said. “If anything, October 7 underscored the traditional Israeli security rationale to justify unending occupation.”
But Palestinians and leading rights groups say the occupation goes far beyond defensive measures. They say it has morphed into an apartheid system, bolstered by settlement building on occupied lands, that gives Palestinians second-class status and is designed to maintain Jewish hegemony from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
Israel rejects any accusation of apartheid.
The case arrives at the court after the UN General Assembly voted by a wide margin in December 2022 to ask the world court for a non-binding advisory opinion on one of the world’s longest-running and thorniest disputes. The request was promoted by the Palestinians and opposed vehemently by Israel. Fifty countries abstained from voting.
In a written statement before the vote, Israel’s UN Ambassador Gilad Erdan called the measure “outrageous”, the UN “morally bankrupt and politicised”, and any potential decision from the court “completely illegitimate”.
After the Palestinians present their arguments, 51 countries and three organisations – the League of Arab States, the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation, and the African Union – will address the panel of judges in the Great Hall of Justice.
Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians seek all three areas for an independent state. Israel considers the West Bank to be disputed territory, whose future should be decided in negotiations.
It has built 146 settlements, according to watchdog group Peace Now, home to more than 500,000 Jewish settlers. The West Bank settler population has grown by more than 15% in the last five years, according to a pro-settler group.
Israel has also annexed east Jerusalem and considers the entire city to be its capital. An additional 200,000 Israelis live in settlements built in east Jerusalem that Israel considers to be neighbourhoods of its capital. Palestinian residents of the city face systematic discrimination, making it difficult for them to build new homes or expand existing ones.
The international community overwhelmingly considers the settlements to be illegal. Israel’s annexation of east Jerusalem, home to the city’s most sensitive holy sites, is not internationally recognised.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel