An extensive analysis of the UNHRC’s ongoing Commission of Inquiry (Res. S-30/1), leading to radical conclusions and recommendations,
De auteurs leggen de werkelijke bedoelingen van het Rights Forum bloot: het boycotten van de Joodse Staat Israël.
Two reports in which definitions and claims of apartheid in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that delegitimise the State of…
Amnesty International’s report accusing Israel of apartheid distorts international criminal law and leaves out the real apartheid-like policies…
The report of Amnesty International accusing Israel of crimes against humanity for maintaining a system of apartheid against…
Amnesty International’s Report “Israel’s Apartheid Against Palestinians” undermines everything the UN stands for, the credibility of international law,…
The Hague Initiative for International Cooperation (thinc.) is an initiative dedicated to the promotion of the Rule of Law in international relations to advance peace and security, friendly relations among nations, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. The focus of our initiative is the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Our goal is to help politicians and policy-makers to make informed decisions on the fair and non-discriminatory application of international law to the Israel-Palestine conflict, and, in doing so, to promote the peaceful resolution of disputes based on UN Charter principles such as the sovereign equality of states, friendly relations between nations, and the Rule of Law.
thinc. is an independent research foundation.The statutory seat of thinc. is The Hague – City of Peace and Justice.
thinc. has the ANBI status.
We have a Newsletter, you can subscribe to our mailing list here:
You may unsubscribe from this service any time if you want.
Content owner
© thinc. 2017
All rights reserved. No unauthorised reproduction or uncredited usage allowed.
thinc. is not responsible for the opinions and analyses by other contributors.
Comments
We welcome comments. Comments will be moderated; they should be respectful, and limited to discussion of international law and policy.
An extensive analysis of the UNHRC’s ongoing Commission of Inquiry (Res. S-30/1), leading to radical conclusions and recommendations,
De auteurs leggen de werkelijke bedoelingen van het Rights Forum bloot: het boycotten van de Joodse Staat Israël.
Two reports in which definitions and claims of apartheid in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that delegitimise the State of Israel are deconstructed, exposing the premeditated attempts of powerful NGOs to delegitimise the Jewish State.
Amnesty International’s report accusing Israel of apartheid distorts international criminal law and leaves out the real apartheid-like policies of the Palestianian Authority against Jews in the WestBank and Gaza.
The report of Amnesty International accusing Israel of crimes against humanity for maintaining a system of apartheid against the Palestinians is a combination of misleading information and lies.
Amnesty International’s Report “Israel’s Apartheid Against Palestinians” undermines everything the UN stands for, the credibility of international law, and the integrity of the international legal system.
The war-crime accusations against Israel after the Hamas terror attacks are unfounded and should be utterly dismissed by the US and its law-abiding partners.
Op 22 oktober 2021 wees de Israëlische minister van Defensie zes Palestijnse NGO’s aan als terreurorganisaties die banden hebben met het Volksfront voor de Bevrijding van Palestina. Lea Bilke en Amb. Alan Baker leggen uit waarom dit volkomen legaal is.
In this op-ed, the authors place the facts and consequences of the 2001 Durban Declaration in the light of international law. What was once intended as a call against racism and discrimination has turned into a manifestation of anti-Semitism whose consequences are manifested to this day, including in the form of the BDS movement. Certainly no reason for a celebratory commemoration.
In deze bijdrage plaatsen de auteurs de feiten en gevolgen van de ‘Durban Verklaring’ van 2001 in het licht van het internationaal recht. Wat ooit bedoeld was als een oproep tegen racisme en discriminatie is uitgemond in een manifestatie van antisemitisme waarvan de gruwelijke gevolgen zich tot op de huidige dag manifesteren, o.a. in de vorm van de BDS beweging. Bepaald geen reden voor een feestelijke herdenking.
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.
Is het Hof van Justitie van de EU ‘koosjer’ als het om godsdienstvrijheid
gaat?
The Hague Statement of jurists summarizes the conclusions of a 2-day conference about the legal implications of UNSC Resolution 2334 and the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice re. the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Two prominent Israeli liberals argue that for the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians to end with peace, Palestinians must come to terms with the fact that there will be no “right of return.”
In this article the authors make short shrift of the absurd claims of some US congresswomen who distort reality and abuse international law.
Calling Israel an apartheid state is absurd. The real threats to peace in Palestine are Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood, not Israel.
The International Legal Forum answers fequently raised questions about Israel’s defensive operation against Hamas in Gaza.
Nederlandse academici die Israëlische instellingen willen boycotten, hebben geen idee.
The discourse, which without irony uses the rhetoric of human rights to undercut international law, diverts attention from the incontrovertibly illegal attacks by Hamas on Israel.
Report of the Briefing by Prof. Geoffrey Corn d.d. 19 May 2021.
Hamas is playing a dangerous game by exposing the Gaza civilians to feed its media campaign.
Neutral application of property law becomes an international incident because a landlord is a Jew.
The UN has scheduled a celebration of the 20th anniversary of the racist Durban conference for September 2021. The author clarifies why “Durban” is nothing less than a manifestation of anti-Semitism and world leaders should follow the example of Australia, Canada and the US and boycot this event.
Ambassador Alan Baker explains why Israeli settlements are not a war crime and are therefore beyond the ICC’s jurisdiction.
The authors, all working at the ICC, opine that it is in the interest of the State of Israel to engage with the ICC rather than ignore the Court.
Proportionality… It is not the number of causalities that determines proportionality but the necessity of the military action balanced against the potential civilian loss.
Several US senators and representatives have signed letters contending that “Israel has an obligation under international law” to provide free vaccines for all Palestinians in the Palestinian Authority (PA). The claims are baseless, and they call into question the credibility of the legal experts who have been peddling them.
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.
In this op-ed the author argues that recognizing “Palestine” as a state before it is in fact a state will not help resolve the Israel/Palestine conflict. In fact it will probably worsen it.
The Abraham Accords are a game changer for the Middle East and for Europe; yet they have been met by European leaders with skepticism. This approach threatens to harm not only the region, but also Europe’s own interests.
In giving itself jurisdiction over the “Situation in Palestine,” the ICC ignores previous treaties and delegitimizes its own authority.
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?
By Prof. Geoffrey Corn, South Texas College of Law* The International Criminal Court (ICC) Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) issued a decision with profound potential consequences for Israel and other States, especially those that like Israel have chosen not to join the Court. The decision authorizes the Prosecutor to investigate and potentially prosecute alleged violations of the…
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.
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.
The International Legal Forum recently published a report ’Summary of Trends & Key Events of 2020 – Looking Ahead Towards 2021‘. A report full of pratical insights w.r.t. anti-Semitism and delegitimization.
The claim that Israel is withholding Covid-19 vaccines from Palestinians is false. This ILF brief sets out Israel’s obligations and what it does beyond that to alleviate Palestinian suffering brought upon them by their own leadership.
Dr. Mark Goldfeder opines that the ruling is factually wrong, legally problematic, discriminatorily hypocritical and systemically dangerous.
The recent normalization agreements between Israel and a number of Arabic states seem to indicate that a growing number of Arabic/Islamic states prefer to switch from the idealistic ‘perpetrator-victim’ paradigm to a more realistic approach – a switch from a situation of captivity and stagnation to a future of peace, prosperity and security.
On 17 December 2020 the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the EU ruled that a Decree by the Flemish Region that requires animals to be stunned prior to slaughter to reduce their suffering does not contravene European law. This judgement is a serious threat to the freedom of religion in Europe.
This book review was written before the US Presidential election. Even though Trump lost the election, the historical narrative of his four years in regard to Israel and the Middle East are important reading, as its effects will be felt for years to come.
In 2014, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups violated the international law prohibition against spreading terror among the civilian population. These acts continue up to the present day and amount to violations of international humanitarian law and war crimes.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECt.HR) has ruled that calls for boycott of Israeli products are justified under European human rights law. This case raises serious policy issues. BDS activities are at their core discriminatory and anti-Semitic.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECt.HR) has ruled that calls for boycott of Israeli products are justified under European human rights law. This case raises serious policy issues.
In a remarkable ceremony in the White House on 4th September 2020, presided over by US President Trump, Serbia and Kosovo signed agreements to normalize their economic relations. The US-brokered agreements were hailed by the US President as “historic”. In reality they do not constitute a comprehensive “normalization” agreement, but resemble little more than an agreement to carry out a list of previously-agreed projects.
On 10 September Advocate General Hogan delivered his much anticipated Opinion in an important case concerning ritual slaughter pending before the Court of Justice of the EU. The case concerns the judicial review of a Decree by the Flemish Region that requires animals to be stunned prior to slaughter to reduce their suffering, thereby effectively prohibiting the slaughter of animals according to Jewish and Muslim rites. The case was brought before the Belgian Constitutional Court, which decided to stay the proceedings and request the CJEU to give a preliminary ruling on the compatibility of the Flemish legislation with European law. AG Hogan suggests that the Flemish Law proscribing slaughter of animals without stunning, including religious slaughter rites, is incompatible with EU law. He proposes that Member States should be allowed to adopt stricter rules than those contained in EU law on animal slaughter, but the prescribed derogation protecting religious rites must be protected.
International law can be confusing even for lawyers and law students who are trying to grasp its basic concepts. What do terms like “conquest”, “belligerent occupation”, “annexation”, “statehood”, “non-self-governing territory” and “the right to self-determination” mean? To the average non-lawyer, these terms might sound like a completely foreign language. In this article, we hope to provide a simple layperson’s guide to some basic concepts in international law, and their relevance to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Two books examine the details behind arguments about the legality of settlements – a review by Prof. Eugene Kontorovich.
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.
The EU is conditioning the minds of European consumers to fit the world-view of the bureaucrats in Brussels. This is morally wrong and breaches international law. George Orwell saw it coming in 1984.
Two years after the launch of the book “Israel on Trial”, the Norwegian ‘Senter mot Antisemittisme’ has published the translation of the book in Norwegian.
The EU claims that labels on products made by Jews in Judea or Samaria are “misleading” if they do not specify the product is made in a “settlement” in the “West Bank”. But actually it is the EU that is misleading consumers.
Prof. Gregory Rose and Andrew Tucker analyze the Response of the Prosecutor of the ICC to amici curiae ‘observations’ concerning the ‘Situation in Palestine’.
The Extended Edition of ‘The Hague Statement of jurists on the Israel-Palestine conflict’ is now available in Finnish. Many thanks to the volunteers in Finland. The Hague Statement is available in English, Finnish, French, Hungarian, Norwegian and Spanish. Forthcoming translations include Italian and Russian.
Against all the negative rhetoric and criticism of the Israeli Government’s plans to apply its civilian law to parts of the ‘West Bank’ professor Bell puts the benefits for both parties.
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.
This is the central question of a Briefing Paper that thinc. released on 25 June 2020. In the Paper, the authors, Prof. Gregory Rose, Dr. Cynthia Day Wallace, Dr. Matthijs de Blois and Mr. Andrew Tucker examine the question vis-a-vis four different principles of international law, and arrive at a clear and decisive conclusion. There…
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.
In response to the Open Letter in Opinio Juris about the plans of the Israeli Government to “annex” certain parts of the “West Bank”, the author points at the misrepresentation of the planned act as ‘annexation’; you cannot annex territory where you already possess sovereignty.
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.
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?
Together with the International Legal Forum, thinc. has made a submission to the ‘Report to the UN General Assembly on Eliminating Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief’ to report that the Ban on Ritual Slaughter as recently issued in Belgium violates the Freedom of Religion and threatens the existence of Jewish and Muslim communities in Europe and beyond.
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.
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.
Today, an Application to submit written Observations regarding the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate alleged war crimes in the “State of Palestine” was filed to the ICC in The Hague.
The lawfare against Israel has many faces. Next to the case pending before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) (Palestine vs. USA) and the investigation started by the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), a communication has been submitted by Palestine against Israel to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). In…
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’.
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.
In 2018, the State of Israel turned 70, but it has never been fully accepted as a member of the international community. Notwithstanding peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, conflict between Israel and some of its neighbors in the region is looming. And peace between Israel and the Palestinians seems as far away as ever. Why?
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.
The freedom of religion is being threatened under the pretence of animal welfare.
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.
Senior Fellow Dr. Cynthia Day Wallace challenges the many misquotes, misrepresentations and misinterpretations by Israeli author Shaul Arieli critiquing U.S. presidential envoy Jason Greenblatt’s address to the UN Security Council. If untruths (or half truths, which are in fact untruths) are allowed to go unchallenged, and the distortion of international law to continue unchecked, a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict risks being seriously impeded.
On May 20, 2019 we reported that the ICC is considering looking into whether Israel has committed war crimes in its dealings with Palestinians. Now, the ICC is even considering initiating an investigation into the legality of Jewish settlements in the so-called “West Bank”, suggesting that such settlements constitute a war crime against Palestinians. The fact is, but for political motives, the ICC would not even be considering these issues.
In today’s society, there is a prevalent trend when it comes to “equity and justice” as regards the nation of Israel. There is a widespread predisposition against any act or situation involving Israel, which is invariably portrayed in a negative light and all too readily pre-judged as contrary to international law, often with no supporting evidence. Looking at the age-old ties of Israel with the Golan, and considering that the Heights are a strategic necessity for the national defense of Israel, justice would require that Israel’s ancient territory of the Golan be reconstituted under Israeli sovereignty.
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.
Report of the thinc. Summer School 2019 including video impressions.
Jerusalem is the subject of proceedings before the International Court of Justice. It is a bizarre case, in which the PLO appears to be trying to rewrite history, and to have that historical revisionism confirmed by the most eminent jurists in the world.
Available now: The ‘Déclaration de la Haye de juristes sur le conflit israélo-palestinien’ (in French).
This blog explores the WHO’s endemic preoccupation with Israel that impairs the organization’s credibility, effectiveness and relevancy.
thinc. is pleased to announce that a translation of ‘The Hague Statement of Jurists on the Israel-Palestine conflict’ is now available in Hungarian. Many thanks to Dr. István Mészáros and Dr. Dávid Surjányi. With this translation the Statement is now available in four languages with a global reach – English, Spanish, Norwegian and Hungarian. Additionally…
From 8 – 9 January 2019, a seminar has taken place in the House of Parliament of the Czech Republic in Prague about the role and policies of the EU vis-a-vis the status of Jerusalem and the future of the Two-state Solution under international law. The Proceedings of the seminar are available from this site.
On Friday 17 May, the German Bundestag became the first national parliament in the European Union to adopt a motion denouncing the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement for its anti-Semitic ‘pattern of argument and methods’.
The so-called ‘Two-state Solution’ appears to be up for grabs. Basically, the Two-state Solution says that the Palestinians have a right to a state covering all of the so-called West Bank, including ‘East Jerusalem’ as their capital. Years of failed negotiations have given way to the growing sentiment that the two-state solution is simply no longer feasible.
The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has for some time been looking into whether Israeli leaders are potentially guilty of war crimes, i.a. in relation to Israeli settlement policies. To open an investigation into the settlements issue, she needs to decide that ’Palestine‘ is a state for the purposes of the Rome Statute that governs the ICC.
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.
In a recent letter titled ‘Europe must stand by the two-state solution for Israel and Palestine’, 37 high-ranking former EU and NATO officials urge the EU to reject President Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ unless this plan commits to the two-state solution and adequately addresses Palestinian demands.
On 12 April 2019, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) unanimously rejected the ICC Prosecutor’s request to authorize her to open a formal investigation into alleged ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘war crimes’ in Afghanistan over the last 15 years. The decision comes at a time when the ICC is under fire for its lack of success.
By Dr. Matthijs de Blois, senior fellow at thinc. Introductie On 8 January 2019, the Netherlands Institute of International Relations – Clingendael – has sent a Policy Brief to the Permanent Committee of Foreign Affairs of the Dutch Parliament, entitled: ‘Wie wind zaait, zal storm oogsten: bezetting en de Staat Israël’. In this Policy…
On 13 September 2018, the 25th anniversary of the ‘Oslo Accords’ was passed. The Dutch government has always been a supporter of these accords. Unfortunately, the implementation of the Oslo Accords has stalled and the belief in the Two-state Solution is waning. Positions on both sides of the conflict harden and the situation among the…
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.
10 DAY SUMMER SCHOOL 2019 For INTERNATIONAL LAW and INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Students, Graduates and Practitioners International Law and the Israel-Palestine Conflict Wednesday 26 June – Friday 5 July 2019 Jerusalem – Israel The Israel-Palestine conflict is perhaps the oldest and most complex conflict in the world. The State of Israel came…
12 September 2018; thinc. is pleased to announce that on the eve of the 25th anniversary of the “Oslo Accords” the Senter mot antisemittisme (Center Against Anti-Semitism) in Oslo has issued a translation of ‘The Hague Statement of Jurists on the Israel-Palestine conflict’ in Norwegian. With this translation the Statement is now available in…
El 7 de agosto de 2018, se publicó una edición ampliada en español de la Declaración de juristas de La Haya sobre el conflicto entre Israelí y Palestino. La edición extendida, que incluye mapas y transcripciones de (extractos de) documentos externos e históricos, puede descargarse aquí.
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.
On the 21st of December 2017 the UN GA again adopted a resolution on Jerusalem within a month of its previous resolution on the same topic . The most recent resolution came in response to the speech of the President of the United States on the 6th of December 2017, in which he recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced the removal of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv and its relocation to Jerusalem.
On the 30th of November, 2017, the General Assembly (GA) of the United Nations (UN) adopted a resolution on Jerusalem (A/RES/72/15). Below, some of the presuppositions and findings of the GA on keys issues are subjected to closer scrutiny, including the Temple Mount and Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This resolution was adopted with…
On 28th and 29th June 2017, 24 international lawyers and experts in the field of international law, from 12 nations, convened at the Peace Palace in The Hague to discuss the legal implications of UNSC Resolution 2334 and the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Res 2334 refers to the…
Today the New Zealand Herald headlines “NZ’s backing of UN resolution condemning Israel’s Palestine settlements ’embarrassing’”. The current NZ Government is determined to fully restore the friendly relations with Israel after the former Minister of Foreign Affairs had endorsed UNSC Res 2334 in December 2016, which led to a diplomatic freeze between New Zealand and…
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…
We have chosen one of the oldest powder kegs in the world, the conflict between Israel, the Palestinians and some nations in the region, as point of departure, because we see it as the most glaring case of the consistent and unabated misuse of law, and the pivot of worldwide political action. We are convinced…
… 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.
Judgment of the Court of Justice (EU), Grand Chamber, 26 July 2017 in CaseC-79/15 P (ECLI:EU:C:2017:584) * This is a judgment in appeal in which the Court of Justice set aside a judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2014 (Hamas v Council). The issue is that since 2001, Hamas has been included in…
On 28th and 29th June 2017, 24 international lawyers and experts in the field of international law, from 12 nations, convened at the Peace Palace in The Hague to discuss the legal implications of UNSC Resolution 2334 and the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). They examined the extent to which…
Every day, media around the world report on the “illegality” of Israeli settlements, and the obligations of Israel under international law to withdraw from the “occupied Palestinian territories”. Time again, Israeli presence in the “Palestinian territories” is claimed to be an “obstacle to global peace”, and as a result all states are required not to recognize those illegalities, and are even obliged to ensure that they stop. Such statements are repeated time and again in the UN organisations like the General Assembly, the Security Council and UNESCO, and are often picked up and repeated by religious bodies like the World Council of Churches. Many national governments, following those statements, are committed as a matter of foreign policy to condemnation of the illegality of many of Israel’s activities and policies, and recognition of the State of Palestine on the basis of the “1967 borders”. Challenging these assertions is often regarded as politically incorrect and those who do so are subject to being shouted down as opponents of peace and justice.
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.
