Britain's representative before the International Court of Justice said that disputes between Israel and Palestine should not be resolved within the framework of the (French) court's advisory function.

Britain defended Israel before the International Court of Justice, saying that disputes between Israel and Palestine should not be resolved within the framework of the court's advisory function.

This came in a speech by Dan Saroshi, a professor of international law at the University of Oxford, on behalf of Britain, before the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands, during hearings to discuss the legal consequences arising from Israel’s policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territories.

“The court should not resolve disputes between parties using its advisory jurisdiction,” Saroshi explained. “Instead, the advisory function of the courts is to provide legal advice to UN bodies requesting an opinion.”

He added, "The current state of the questions raised in the court's opinion would create a situation against Israel."

Saroshi pointed out that Israel's approval must be obtained in this case.

In turn, Sally Langrishe, Director of Legal Affairs at the British Foreign Office and its representative to the International Court of Justice, said that her country’s position on the conflict has been known for a long time, as “the two-state solution is the only solution that will guarantee self-determination for the Palestinians and protect Israel’s identity and security.”

Langrish added that Britain wants an immediate halt to attacks in Gaza, and then progress towards a sustainable and permanent ceasefire.

Friday is the fifth day of hearings held by the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of Israel’s practices in the occupied Palestinian territories at the request of the United Nations General Assembly.

In a similar advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice ruled in 2004 that the construction of the separation wall in the occupied West Bank was illegal, and demanded that Israel remove it from all Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem and its suburbs, with compensation for those affected, but Tel Aviv did not implement the court’s request.

Unlimited support

A few days ago, Britain abstained from voting for an Algerian draft resolution in the UN Security Council that called for an immediate ceasefire for humanitarian reasons in Gaza.

The resolution received the support of 13 member states of the Council, while the United States used its veto power for the third time since the start of this war.

Recently, a report revealed that Britain - along with Germany - tops the list of European countries that continue to support Israel with weapons, despite the accusations of genocide that are persecuting Israel in its war on the Gaza Strip.

The Supreme Court in London also rejected a lawsuit to suspend the export of British weapons to Israel in light of the ongoing Israeli war on Gaza for more than 4 months, which resulted in tens of thousands of civilian casualties.

The Palestinian Al-Haq Foundation for Human Rights and the Global Legal Action Network coalition filed the lawsuit last December, and last January the plaintiffs asked the Supreme Court to expedite a judicial review of the British government’s decision to continue selling military spare parts and weapons to Israel, before... The court rejects the case.

Source: Al Jazeera + Anatolia