Courtesy: ARAB NEWS
The second day of oral proceedings began on Tuesday at the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning the legal ramifications of
Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories.
Representatives from South Africa, Algeria, Saudi Arabia,
the Netherlands, Bangladesh, and Belgium have presented preliminary arguments.
This is said to be the largest case at the ICJ with more
than 50 countries providing arguments, and at least three international
organizations are slated to address the judges at the United Nations' top court
until February 26. A nonbinding legal opinion is anticipated following months
of judge deliberations.
On Monday, Palestinian representatives articulated their
stance on the legal repercussions of Israel's occupation of the West Bank, East
Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip. They asserted that the occupation is illegal and
must cease immediately, unconditionally, and entirely.
Israel has abstained from attending the hearings but
submitted a five-page written statement expressing concerns that an advisory
opinion would hinder attempts to resolve the conflict, citing prejudiced
questions posed by the UN General Assembly.
Belgium's legal expert, Vaios Koutroulis, has denounced
Israel's settlement policy, highlighting its aim to create permanent
demographic changes in Palestinian territories.
Koutroulis emphasized that Israel's settlement policy
violates fundamental principles of international law, including the prohibition
of acquiring territory by force and the right to self-determination.
He pointed out that the establishment of settlements leads
to the creation of two separate systems, one for settlers and another for Palestinians,
which exacerbates inequalities.
Belgium condemned violence against Palestinians and urged
Israel to end settlement activities, restore expropriated property, and bring
perpetrators of violence to justice.
Koutroulis called on third states to refrain from
recognizing the legality of the situation, withhold support, and collaborate to
end violations of international law.
Riaz Hamidullah, representing Bangladesh, emphasized that
the principle of self-defense cannot justify prolonged occupation, addressing
the ongoing situation in the Palestinian territories.
Israel's occupation contradicts three fundamental pillars of
international law: the right to self-determination, the prohibition of
acquiring territory by force, and the prohibition of racial discrimination and
apartheid.
In adherence to international law, any occupation must be
temporary, and territorial acquisition is illegal. Israel's extended
occupation, coupled with territorial expansion, constitutes a violation of
international law.
Hamidullah underscored that the right to self-defense cannot
excuse breaches of international law, including the right to
self-determination. Israel's denial of Palestinian self-determination has led
to widespread condemnation and hinders prospects for peace.
He called for Israel to cease all actions hindering
Palestinian self-determination, including discriminatory legislation and
military presence, and to provide reparations for damages incurred.
Hamidullah urged all states to ensure the cessation of any
legal barriers to self-determination and to refrain from recognizing or
supporting Israel's illegal acts. Cooperation among states is essential to
compel Israel to comply with international law.
He also urged the UN Security Council to consider further
action to end the occupation and stressed the urgency of dismantling the
apartheid system in place.
René Lefeber, representing the Netherlands at the ICJ,
affirmed the court's jurisdiction and emphasized the universal right to
self-determination as outlined in the UN Charter.
He highlighted how prolonged occupation undermines this
principle and noted the conditions for the legitimacy of occupying foreign
territory.
Lefeber concluded that an occupation failing to meet these
criteria risks violating the prohibition against the use of force.
Occupying powers are prohibited from transferring
populations in the territories they occupy, constituting a war crime under the
Rome Statute, Lefeber said.
Once an occupation begins, the occupying power must protect
civilians, he added.
Serious breaches of international norms should be addressed
at the UN, and if necessary, states must cooperate to end unlawful situations,
refraining from recognizing or supporting such breaches, Lefeber concluded for
the Netherlands.
Ziad Al-Atiyah, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the
Netherlands, has strongly criticized Israel for its actions in the occupied
Palestinian territories, stating that they are legally indefensible.
Al-Atiyah emphasized the importance of holding Israel
accountable for ignoring international law, particularly regarding its
treatment of civilians in Gaza and its continued impunity.
Saudi Arabia expressed deep concern over the killing of
civilians and rejected Israel's argument of self-defense, stating that
depriving Palestinians of basic means of survival is unjustifiable.
Al-Atiyah accused Israel of dehumanizing Palestinians and
committing genocide against them, calling for the international community to
take action.
Regarding the jurisdiction of the court, Al-Atiyah asserted
that the arguments against its jurisdiction lack merit, urging the court to
issue an opinion on the matter.
Israel's ongoing disregard for ceasefire calls and
provisional measures, as well as its expansion of illegal settlements and
expulsion of Palestinians from their homes, were condemned by Saudi Arabia.
The Kingdom highlighted Israel's violations of international
obligations, including ignoring UN resolutions condemning its conduct and
preventing Palestinians from exercising their right to self-defense.
Israel's intentions to maintain and expand illegal
settlements, as evidenced by its 2018 Basic Law declaring Jerusalem as its
capital, were also criticized for undermining Palestinian self-determination.
Algeria's legal representative, Ahmed Laraba, took the floor
at the ICJ to present his country's stance on the enduring occupation of
Palestinian territories. In his address, Laraba highlighted the intricacies
surrounding the concept of prolonged occupation, shedding light on its legal
foundations and historical context.
Referencing Article 42 of The Hague Convention of 1907,
Laraba underscored the undisputed basis of the notion of occupation, as
acknowledged by the court in a previous opinion. He emphasized the temporary
nature of the occupation, originally conceived to manage post-conflict
situations and facilitate peace agreements.
Laraba pointed out the discrepancy between the intended
temporary regime and the reality of a prolonged occupation, noting that the
drafters of the time did not foresee a peaceful coexistence between the
occupier and the occupied. This incongruity underscores the complexities and
challenges inherent in addressing the prolonged occupation of Palestinian
territories.
Algeria's intervention at the ICJ serves to advocate for a
comprehensive understanding of the legal, historical, and humanitarian
dimensions of the occupation issue. Laraba's arguments contribute to the
ongoing discourse surrounding the quest for justice and resolution in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Pieter Andreas Stemmet, Acting Chief State Law Adviser at
the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, announced South
Africa's commitment to advocating for the Palestinian people's right to
self-determination.
Stemmet emphasized that the UN has repeatedly recognized the
inalienable right of Palestinians to self-determination. He condemned Israel's
expansion of settlement activity, stating that it violates Article 49 of the
Fourth Geneva Convention, to which Israel is a signatory.
In addressing concerns about potential apartheid in Israel,
Stemmet referenced the Namibia vs. South Africa case, where the court ruled
that race-based exceptions and limitations constitute a denial of fundamental
rights and violate the principles of the UN Charter.
Stemmet underscored the well-documented extent of Israel's
violations and reiterated that the prohibition of apartheid applies
universally, including to Israel.
Drawing parallels to South Africa's illegal presence in
Namibia, Stemmet called for attention to the legal consequences of Israel's
ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem.
South Africa's Ambassador to The Netherlands Vusimuzi
Madonsela urged for an end to Israel's violations against Palestinian
territories, emphasizing the critical importance of this advisory opinion for
Palestinians.
Madonsela highlighted the prolonged occupation, spanning
over 50 years, conducted in defiance of international law with little
international intervention.
He questioned when Israel's impunity for rights violations
and breaches of international norms would cease, particularly amidst ongoing
attacks on Gaza and Israel's disregard for legal orders, indicating its belief
in unrestricted actions against Palestinians.
Ad Home