Israel’s Enemies Attack the Rule of Law
Mobilising anti-Western UN member states, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) is using the international courts in The Hague to undermine Israel’s security and to achieve international recognition of the Palestinians’ right to establish an independent Palestinian state that would seek the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel.
“The PLO is still committed to the use of violence (jihad) to achieve the destruction of Israel”
The PLO has never changed its Charter since 1968 and is still committed to the use of violence (jihad) to achieve the destruction of Israel.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been asked by a group of 87 member states in the UN General Assembly to issue an advisory opinion on the legal status of the Israeli ‘prolonged occupation’ of the territories referred to by the UN General Assembly as the ‘occupied Palestinian territory’ (OPT).
It is expected the Court will shortly issue an Advisory Opinion that will be devastating for Israel.
At the same time, the ICJ is entertaining a series of cases under the Genocide Convention alleging that Israel is committing genocide. These cases are still in their preliminary phase, and the Court has not yet decided whether Israel is guilty of genocide. Yet the Court’s preliminary rulings have been used widely to justify the conclusion that Israel is committing genocide.
Just down the road in The Hague, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is claiming the jurisdiction to prosecute Israeli leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity – even though Israel is not a party to the Rome Statute and Palestine is not a state.
Together, these cases represent a full assault on the rule of law. The legitimacy of the international courts, and of the UN system as a while, is at stake.
“The questions posed by UNGA Resolution 77/247 to the ICJ are twisted, prejudiced, and one-sided”
The request to the Court is the result of a campaign launched by PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas in 2011 and implemented in concert with about half of the states in the UN General Assembly in the past decade. The first step was elevating Palestine to ‘UN non-member observer state status’ in 2012. This absurd resolution provided the Palestinians with the opportunity to upgrade their lawfare against the Jewish people and avoid negotiations.
The questions posed by UNGA Resolution 77/247 to the ICJ are twisted, prejudiced, and one-sided. They ask the Court to assume an “ongoing violation by Israel of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination” resulting from Israel’s “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 from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures.”
Addressing these questions would require an immense fact-finding task beyond judicially manageable standards.
Instead, the ICJ is being asked to rely on one-sided and inaccurate reports and materials from other UN organs and agencies known for their anti-Israel bias. Israel has no control over how these materials, which serve as evidence, are produced and submitted to the Court, resulting in a violation of due process. The UK’s written submission to the Court underlined the “highly partisan nature of the terms of the Request.”
The questions posed to the Court are highly controversial. Firstly, they aim to establish a new presumption in international law, specifically that a “prolonged occupation” is inherently illegal. This presumption is baseless. Secondly, they reference “the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem”. This term is ambiguous and seems to extend beyond the typical discussion about the legal status of East Jerusalem. It deceptively suggests Israel’s infringement of religious freedom concerning the holy places in Jerusalem for Jews, Christians, and Muslims, with the ultimate intention of laying the background for converting the city into an international zone and removing the Israeli presence.” Third, they ask the Court to assume that East Jerusalem and the West Bank are “Palestinian”. Fourth, they assert that the Palestinians have an absolute right to statehood, bypassing any obligation to negotiate terms and conditions ensuring Israel’s security.
The essence of the Palestinian claims is a complete rewriting of history. Supported by the Arab League, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, the African Union, and other states, the PLO disputes the validity and legitimacy of the Balfour Declaration (1917) and the Mandate for Palestine sanctioned by the League of Nations (1922). This is an extraordinarily bold move in their lawfare agenda, undermining the foundations and legitimacy of the whole of the modern State of Israel. The foundational character of these two international instruments was recognised in Israel’s Declaration of Independence in 1948.
It is about time to recognise that this conflict is not territorial but existential. The cancellation of the Mandate for Palestine is intended to lay the legal foundation for the extinction of the Jewish state and its replacement with a Palestinian Arab state from the river to the sea, in which Jews and other non-Muslims would be forced to live as dhimmis.
Elevating Palestinian self-government to full statehood would be suicidal for Israel and disastrous for peace. Granting full statehood to the Palestinian people at this stage, with their failed self-government authorities, will result in a
failed Palestinian state. The likelihood is that Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) would soon take over the PA in the West Bank and that the Iranian regime—through its Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)—would extend their oppressive influence in the area exponentially increasing Israel’s existential risk.
The Palestinians have consistently and deliberately refused to comply with the most important and crucial one: to stop violence and incitement to violence towards Israel and Israelis. Meanwhile, 70% of civilians in Gaza continue to support Hamas in one way or another, and the PA continues with the pay-for- slay scheme.
“The UN has been hijacked by a large number of tyrannical and rogue regimes under the guise of conventional states”
The fact is that the UN has been hijacked by a large number of tyrannical and rogue regimes under the guise of conventional states. Its reputation has sunk to the lowest level, and some have begun to predict its demise, at least in its current form. The credibility and legitimacy of the international courts are being dragged into this demise.
It is time for civilised and democratic countries to start thinking of total reform.
The Hague Initiative for International Cooperation (thinc.) is a global network of international lawyers who challenge the delegitimisation of Israel and promote the fair use of international law. You can support the work of thinc. by making a donation. For more information: www.thinc-israel.org
