There is much confusion and controversy about the plan of the Israeli government to extend its legal administration and excercise its sovereignty in certain parts of Judea and Samaria per 1 July 2020. This Q&A is intended to assist the reader in understanding what international law says about the plans.
The author compares the San Remo Resolution of 1920 with the Oslo Accords of the 1990’s and draws a striking conclusion.
By Andrew Tucker, Director at thinc. On the 10th of June, over 100 international lawyers issued an Open Letter to the Israeli government, stating that Israel’s policy proposal is “clearly unlawful, and will most likely have adverse consequences, including … consequences of an internationally wrongful act … [and] a high likelihood of violent…
On 5th June 2020 the “State of Palestine” submitted its response to the Pre-Trial Chamber’s Order requesting them to provide additional information about recent statements by the Palestinian organizations concerning the Oslo Accords (“Palestine’s Response on Oslo”).
ICC Prosecutor sweeps aside arguments made by several highly regarded international lawyers, and seven States who are Parties to the ICC Statute of Rome.
Fundamental to the rule of law is equal treatment and non-arbitrary, fair application of law. Instead, the International Criminal Court (ICC) exemplifies UN politicisation of international law principles and bureaucratic corruption of the rule of law, at extravagant cost. Read more.
On 5 December 2019 the Office of the Prosecutor of the
International Criminal Court issued its annual Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2019. In this report, the Prosecutor, Ms. Fatou
Bensouda, gave a summary of the status of the twelve “situations” under examination by her office. She has indicated strongly that the Office intends to move forward soon to officially investigate Israeli leaders for war crimes and possibly also crimes against humanity relating to the “situation in Palestine”. In our view, the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC is making a grave mistake.
A legal analysis of the recent judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Psagot Winery Case, concerning the question how products imported into Europe from the “occupied Palestinian territories” should be labeled, shows that the reasoning of the ECJ is seriously flawed.
The Israeli government has called the BDS movement the second most serious existential threat to Israel. Second only to the threats issued by Iran to destroy Israel. Israel is not overreacting. The BDS movement is both dangerous and misleading. As Canadian PM Trudeau recently remarked, it is also anti-Semitic.
In a Judgment of 2 September 2019 the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court orders the Prosecutor to reconsider her decision not to investigate the Gaza flotilla case. The wanderings of this case through the avenues and alleys of the procedural provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC seems to become a journey without end.