The author demonstrates razor sharp that the central agenda of the “apartheid campaign” is to delegitimize and demonize Zionism and the existence of Israel. HumanRightsWatch’s artificial and manipulative process under the façade of systematic legal analysis is used to provide support for, and mutually reinforces, the political objective – to delegitimize Jewish self-determination.
In this article the authors make short shrift of the absurd claims of some US congresswomen who distort reality and abuse international law.
Ambassador Alan Baker explains why Israeli settlements are not a war crime and are therefore beyond the ICC’s jurisdiction.
The March 3, 2021 decision of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to open a full investigation of the “Situation in Palestine” has prompted responses advising the Israeli government to take a more
cooperative approach toward the Court. Yet there are a number of
strategic, diplomatic, and legal arguments for not cooperating. This study analyzes the considerations to be made.
The judges at the ICC in The Hague decided that all activity in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip can be investigated, but the day we might see arrest warrants issued for Israelis, if at all, remains a long way off. What can be expected, and how can Israel prevent further legal moves against it?
Late Friday 5th February 2021, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) made its long-awaited decision on the question whether it has “jurisdiction” to prosecute Israeli and Palestinian leaders for crimes committed “on the territory of Palestine”. The decision is extremely controversial and pushes the boundaries of international law.
Existential conflicts cannot be solved: a new framework for resolving the Israeli–Palestinian dispute
In this essay the author, Dr. Bren Carlill presents a sobering argument: ‘existential’ conflicts cannot be resolved. Only when the objectives of both sides soften to become ‘territorialist’ can the Israeli–Palestinian dispute be negotiated.
Prof. Joseph Spoerl compares the different approaches taken by Palestinians and Germans to the dislocations that avoidable wars of their own causing inflicted on these two peoples in the 1940s.
It is often argued that the Mandate for Palestine ended with the withdrawl of the British on 15 May 1948. In this article Dr. Matthijs de Blois cogently argues that this is a misconception under international law.
The new Israeli government intends to extend Israeli sovereignty to parts of Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank). The media cry out ‘illegal annexation’ but is this a question of annexation? How can one annex what you’re entitled to?
It is widely believed that the State of Israel was born as a result of UN Resolution 181 of 1947. The truth is that the legal rights of the Jewish people and Israel as a nation were founded in international law well before the very existence of the United Nations, dating back to international legal instruments agreed shortly after World War I, at Villa Devachan in San Remo, Italy, on 25 April 1920.
In this article the author analyses historical and actual objections under international law to the Two-State Solution and the unilateral declaration of the ‘State of Palestine’.
The freedom of religion is being threatened under the pretence of animal welfare.
The Israeli Products Labelling Controversy – Imposing Politically-Motivated Opinions in the Name of Law
The Opinion of AG Hogan at the ECJ in the Psagot Winery case is scrutinized. Conclusion: the AG’s Opinion seems more an expression of political belief than a correct legal opinion based on a sound interpretation and fair application of international law.
President Trump’s recent proclamation recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights has attracted much criticism. The prohibition on the use of force to acquire territory is an important foundation of modern international law, but it does not mean that wars of aggression cannot have territorial consequences.
President Donald Trump’s decision to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has been subject to intense international scrutiny. Amid the debate, what does the law suggest? Read here what Professor Gregory Rose of the School of Law at the University of Wollongong, Australia, wrote about it.
The status of Jerusalem is one of the main legal issues in the debate on Israel and its relationship to the Palestinian Arabs. The speech of the American President, Donald Trump, and the fierce reactions it provoked, as well as the recent resolutions of the UN General Assembly (GA) illustrate this. In order to…
In this article the author, Dr. Cynthia Day Wallace, demonstrates cogently that the 1967 lines are not “borders” under international law. Therefore, this word should not be used to create and perpetuate the impression that Israel has illegally transgressed the borders of another State.
The British Mandate: Defining the Legality of Jewish Sovereignty over Judea and Samaria under International Law
By Karen Stahl-Don “Facts are stubborn things” said John Adams, the second President of the United States. This paper debunks pervasive but false narratives that — try as they might — cannot alter the “stubborn” legal facts, history and evidence that lead to an inevitable conclusion: international law supports the legality of Jewish sovereignty over…
Israel’s borders and territorial scope are a source of seemingly endless debate. Remarkably, despite the intensity of the debates, little attention has been paid to the relevance of the doctrine of uti possidetis juris to resolving legal aspects of the border dispute. Uti possidetis juris is widely acknowledged as the doctrine of customary international…
… this is how Dr. Matthijs de Blois, Senior fellow of thinc., characterises the report of the Special Rapporteur of the UN on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories, the Canadian law professor S. Michael Lynk. The Report has the clear objective to heighten the pressure of the “international community” on Israel.
It is often claimed by media and many UN policy documents that the “Israeli settlements” in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are in violation of international law. This report reviews the main legal and factual arguments associated with this claim and concludes that such simplistic characterizations are biased and unfounded under international law.