Independent rights experts urge States to comply with ICJ ruling on Israel

This article is published in association with United Nations.

UN Member States must immediately comply with the recent “landmark ruling” by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, a group of 38 UN independent human rights experts said on Tuesday. 

The UN’s highest court issued an advisory opinion on 19 July which said that Israel’s occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, “is unlawful”. It was responding to a request by the UN General Assembly for an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.

“The advisory opinion reaffirms peremptory norms prohibiting annexation, settlements, racial segregation and apartheid, and should be seen as declaratory in nature and binding on Israel and all States supporting the occupation,” the experts said. 

Right to self-determination

Furthermore, the Court refuted the notion that Palestinian self-determination must be achieved solely through bilateral negotiations with Israel, they added, noting that this requirement has subjected Palestinians to violence, dispossession and rights violations for 30 years. 

“The Court has finally reaffirmed a principle that seemed unclear, even to the United Nations: Freedom from foreign military occupation, racial segregation and apartheid is absolutely non-negotiable,” the experts said. 

They also welcomed the Court’s recognition that converting occupation into annexation by demolishing homes, denying housing permits, and land grabs, violates preemptory norms prohibiting the use of force to annex occupied territory.

“May this historic ruling begin the realisation of the Palestinian people’s fundamental right to self-determination, and peace premised on freedom for all,” they said.

‘A critical tool’ 

The advisory opinion “will serve as a critical tool to restore respect for international law, especially at this crucial moment when the Court is also considering Israel’s alleged violations of the Genocide Convention,” they added.

They recalled that it came 20 years after another ICJ advisory opinion on the illegality of Israel’s construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory – an “authoritative ruling” which Israel and UN Member States largely disregarded, they said, thus “allowing impunity to reign”.

They warned that Israel has intensified attacks on both civilians and resources in Gaza since the 19 July ruling.

“Israel must comply with this advisory opinion, and other ICJ orders issued this year,” they said. “Israel must stop acting as if uniquely above the law.”

Call for arms embargo

The rights experts added that “while the UN Security Council and General Assembly will consider strategies to ensure a swift end to the illegal occupation…States must immediately review all diplomatic, political, and economic ties with Israel, inclusive of business and finance, pension funds, academia and charities.” 

They called for action, including an arms embargo and targeted sanctions, as well as investigations and prosecutions against those involved in crimes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly dual citizens serving in the Israeli military or involved in settler violence. 

“The Court’s findings should also be widely disseminated to ensure that the illegality of Israel’s presence in the occupied territory is fully understood at all levels of the government and reflected in public documents and education systems,” they said. 

“Laws and policies that penalise opposition to or impede advocacy against Israel’s occupation and apartheid must be rescinded.” 

Role of independent experts 

The experts who issued the statement were all appointed by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, and form part of the body’s Special Procedures.

The Special Rapporteurs and members of UN Working Groups are mandated by the Human Rights Council to monitor and report on specific human rights situations or thematic issues. 

They serve in their individual capacity; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary.