The Role of International Law in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine has been a source of international legal scrutiny, particularly since the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its advisory opinion in 2004 and more recently in 2023. This article delves into the legal implications of these rulings and their significance in the context of international law.

2004 and 2023 Advisory Opinions: A Critical Examination

In 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released an advisory opinion on the legality of Israel's 'wall' construction within the West Bank occupied territories. This opinion established that the construction was a violation of international law. Following the UN General Assembly's request, the ICJ revisited the issue in 2023, issuing another advisory opinion on Israel's policies and practices in the 'occupied Palestinian territory (oPT), including East Jerusalem.'

The 2023 advisory opinion was requested by the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The commission's report, supported by the UN General Assembly, highlighted the necessity for an ICJ advisory opinion to address the prevailing situation in the oPT.

Key Findings of the 2023 Advisory Opinion

The 2023 advisory opinion found Israel in violation of international law, particularly in several critical areas:

Settlement expansion in the oPT Construction of associated infrastructure, including the wall Exploitation of natural resources Proclamation of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital Comprehensive application of Israeli domestic law in East Jerusalem Extensive application of Israeli law in the West Bank, including Area C

The court noted with grave concern the expansion of Israel's settlement policy and the establishment of additional governing powers within the Ministry of Defense. It also highlighted the significant increase in the size of existing Israeli settlements, with around 24,300 housing units being advanced or approved, including approximately 9,670 in East Jerusalem.

Annexation and Control of the Occupied Palestinian Territory

The ICJ concluded that Israel's policies and practices, including the maintenance and expansion of settlements, the construction of associated infrastructure, and the comprehensive application of its domestic law in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, amount to annexation of large parts of the oPT. These actions are designed to remain in place indefinitely and create irreversible effects on the ground.

The court emphasized that Israel is illegally occupying the oPT and must withdraw according to international law. It also affirmed that Israel is now bound to pay Palestinians reparations for its crimes, including restitution of land, assets, and cultural property taken from Palestinians. Detailed measures include:

Evacuation of all settlers from existing settlements Dismantling parts of the wall constructed by Israel in the oPT Allowing Palestinians displaced during the occupation to return to their original place of residence

Implications and Criticisms

The advisory opinion, particularly its findings on annexation and settlement expansion, has significant implications for international law and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Zionists fear possible actions from other states following the court's advisory opinion, which could undermine Israel's claims to territorial integrity and legality under international law.

The advisory opinion has also put pressure on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Despite this pressure, the Israeli government, similar to its 2004 stance, has rejected the advisory opinion and its findings.

The international legal community will continue to monitor Israel's compliance with these rulings, as they represent a crucial step in addressing the ongoing conflict and upholding the principles of international law.