play videoplay video

Video duration 01 minutes 06 seconds 01:06

The Hague -

South African representatives on Tuesday opened the second day of public hearings at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, where they called for a non-binding legal opinion declaring the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories “unlawful” to help reach a settlement.

The session comes within a series of sessions that will continue until February 26 of this year, against the backdrop of the United Nations General Assembly’s request in 2022 from the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion regarding Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

Alongside the South African legal team, representatives from 10 countries presented their arguments on the legal consequences of the occupying state, including Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Belgium and the Netherlands, while Brazil, Belize and Bolivia participated in the afternoon.

Canada was scheduled to present its arguments and observations during the morning session, but decided to withdraw at the last minute.

Hearings at the International Court of Justice continue until February 26 regarding Israel’s occupation of Palestine (Al Jazeera)

Apartheid

Peter Andreas Stemmett, the lawyer representing South Africa and the Acting Chief State Law Adviser at the Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation, announced South Africa's commitment to defending the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, noting that the United Nations has recognized several times the "inalienable" right of the Palestinians to do so.

Stemmett also condemned Israeli settlement activity, which violates Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, to which the occupation is a signatory, stressing that the prohibition of apartheid applies to all countries of the world, including Israel.

In an interview with Al Jazeera Net, South Africa's ambassador to the Netherlands, Vusimuzi Madonsela, pointed out Israel's failure to comply with the International Justice order - which it issued on January 26 last year - to take temporary measures after it was accused of violating the Genocide Convention.

The court has adopted interim measures or binding orders, including requiring Israel to prevent genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, ensure the provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance, and prevent and punish incitement to commit genocide.

Madonsela added that his country submitted a letter to the court last week asking it to use its powers in relation to Article 75 of the Rome Statute to determine the need to impose further temporary measures.

This article stipulates that the court shall establish principles regarding reparation for damages caused to or in relation to victims, including restoration of rights, compensation, and rehabilitation.

Accordingly, the Court may determine in its ruling upon request or on its own initiative in exceptional circumstances the scope and extent of any damage, loss or injury, and state the principles on which it acted in accordance with the Rome Statute.

Illegal occupation

During the session, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the Netherlands, Ziad Al-Attiyah, criticized Israel's actions because they cannot be defended legally, stressing the need to hold it accountable for ignoring international law with regard to its treatment of civilians in the Gaza Strip in particular and its continued impunity.

He said, "The International Court of Justice is required to answer questions related to the legal consequences resulting from depriving the Palestinians of the right to self-determination."

Al-Attiyah added in his speech to Al-Jazeera Net, "We support the court's declaration of the illegality and illegality of the occupation, and that any approach to it contributes to strengthening it. At every historical stage, Israel loses its legitimacy and its foundations, which is reflected in those who try to defend it."

Saudi Arabia also rejected Israel's argument to defend itself, considering that depriving the Palestinian people of basic livelihoods is "unjustified," and called on the international community to take action.

In a related context, Bolivia's ambassador to the Netherlands, Roberto Calzadilla Sarmiento, condemned Israel's discriminatory measures with colonial intent because they are a clear violation of international law and norms, and aim to strip the Palestinian people of their property and change the demographic landscape in Jerusalem.

The representative of Belize, lawyer Ben Juratwitch, reinforced the argument that the Gaza Strip is still under occupation, despite the withdrawal of Israeli forces and settlers in 2005, explaining that the occupation of the Strip predates the date of last October 7 and dates back to the year 1967.

Solidarity with Palestine and Gaza demonstrate in front of the headquarters of International Justice (Al Jazeera)

War crime

For his part, Belgian legal expert Faius Coutroulis condemned the Israeli settlement policy “which violates the basic principles of international law,” highlighting that its goal is to bring about permanent demographic changes in the Palestinian territories, and to create two separate systems, one for settlers and the other for Palestinians, which leads to exacerbation of inequality. .

As for the representative of Bangladesh, Riad Hamidullah, he stressed that the principle of self-defense cannot be a justification for a long-term occupation, pointing out that Israel contradicts three basic pillars of international law, which are: the prohibition of discrimination and apartheid, the right to self-determination, and the prohibition of seizing lands by force.

The representative of the Netherlands at International Justice, Rene Lefebvre, pointed out that the occupying forces are prohibited from transferring residents in the territories they occupy, which constitutes a war crime under the Rome Statute. Speaking during the session, he concluded that states must cooperate to end illegal situations and refrain from recognizing or supporting these violations.

During his presentation of his country’s position on the issue, Algeria’s legal representative, Ahmed Laarraba, touched on Article 42 of the Hague Convention of 1907, which states that “the territory of the state is considered occupied when it is under the actual authority of the enemy’s army. Occupation only includes lands in which this can be exercised.” power after its establishment.

Laraba pointed to the contradiction between the intended temporary regime and the reality of the prolonged occupation, saying that the drafters at that time did not expect peaceful coexistence between the occupier and the occupied.

Source: Al Jazeera