ICJ ruling on Israeli occupation has historic implications — experts

By

Sadiq Bhat

The International Court of Justice's (ICJ) advisory opinion on Friday declaring Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories illegal under international law will have broad historic implications, observers feel.

The key ruling, while not legally binding, sends a clear message to Israel's allies that supporting the settlement policy and ongoing violence in the occupied territories is no longer feasible, according to experts who spoke to TRT World for this story.

Dr Luigi Daniele, noted academic, specialising in Law of Armed Conflicts and International, European, and Comparative Law at Nottingham Law School, views the ICJ's opinion as transformative for both — international law and the law of occupation. Speaking to TRT World from the UK, Danielle emphasised the decision's broader impact.

"This is an advisory opinion (by the ICJ) that has historic implications for the war against Palestine but also in general for international law and the conceptions of the law of occupation.

"It is a victory for Palestinian international lawyers and for many of us who have been denouncing what the court has acknowledged today for at least a decade, which is that the Israeli military and settlers' presence in the occupied Palestinian territory has zero valid titles under international law and is, on the contrary, a violation thereof."

Daniele highlighted that ICJ adopted a normative conception of occupation in this case, explaining that even if the law of occupation doesn't prescribe time limits for military occupations, the legality or unlawfulness of occupation must still be determined under other relevant rules of international law.

"The top court's findings assert that Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory is unlawful due to its aim of permanent control and annexation, equating to the use of force for aggressive purposes against another nation's territorial integrity," he remarked.

Hostile environment for Palestinians

Sami Moubayed, historian and former Carnegie scholar, echoed Dr Daniele's sentiments, describing the ICJ ruling as a historic milestone. He underscored the significance of the verdict since the first case was raised before the World Court in May 1947.

"The ICJ ruling is certainly a historic milestone since the first case was raised before the World Court in May 1947," Moubayed told TRT World. "This isn’t just symbolic; this verdict will put many countries in a difficult position, especially the US and UK, who have been the most hawkish since the Gaza War began," he added.

Moubayed pointed out that the verdict's scope extends beyond Gaza, addressing the occupation of the West Bank and the entirety of the 57-year occupation since 1967. This comprehensive judgment amplifies the international community's scrutiny of Israel's actions in the occupied territories, he said.

Experts agree that the ICJ opinion unmistakably recognises that Israel's unlawful practices have fostered a hostile environment for Palestinians.

Daniele noted that the occupied territory is being de-palestinianised, deprived of its demographic, economic, and political features to make way for settlers.

Conception of occupation

"The court has said that the Israeli occupation as a whole in the entirety of the Palestinian territory, which represents a single territorial unity, is unlawful because it's characterised by the purpose of permanently controlling Palestine, annexing it and considering it domestic Israeli territory, which is tantamount to a use of force for aggressive purposes against the territorial integrity of another nation," he added.

Rachel Williams, senior researcher and political expert based in Washington, DC, provided additional insights, emphasising that the advisory ruling extends beyond Israel to include its allies.

"The ruling sends a clear message that supporting the settlement policy or ongoing violence and persecution in the occupied territories is unacceptable.

"ICJ opinion doesn't solely target Israel; it also addresses Israel's allies, conveying that they cannot support the settlement policy or the ongoing violence and persecution in the occupied territories in any manner," Williams told TRT World.

Dr Sahar Mohamed Khamis, Professor of Communication at the University of Maryland, feels the ruling sets a precedent that has never been established before.

"The court’s opinion that Palestinians in the occupied territories should be compensated by Israel demonstrates a very firm and bold stance, which is remarkable and unprecedented," Prof Khamis revealed to TRT World.

"The next step would be to refer this case back to the United Nations General Assembly, which should adopt a resolution calling on Israel to end its occupation," she noted.

As the international community absorbs the implications of this historic ruling, the ICJ's ruling comes at a pivotal moment as Israel's ongoing war in Gaza continues, killing at least 38,848 Palestinians — majority of them women and children –– and wounding 89,459 others. Israeli invasion has displaced most of 2.3 million people in the tiny coastal enclave.

"The ICJ has finally adopted a normative conception of occupation, acknowledging that the Israeli occupation as a whole is unlawful," Daniele concluded.

Sadiq S Bhat is a Senior Editor at TRT World.