PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)

______________________________________________________________________________________________
the law of occupation—be it
under the Fourth Geneva
Convention or customary
LEGAL CONSEQUENCES ARISING FROM THE international law—does not
POLICIES AND PRACTICES OF ISRAEL IN THE concern itself with how the
OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY, INCLUDING occupation began. Instead, it
EAST JERUSALEM
operates on the fundamental
assumption that such
occupation is temporary and
Two questions posed by the General Assembly,
cannot, under any
and recalls that they are formulated as follows:
circumstances, transfer
sovereignty to the occupying
“(a) What are the legal consequences arising from the power.
ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the
Palestinian people to self-determination, from its
Crucially, the prolonged nature of an occupation
prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of
does not grant the occupying power any new
the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including
rights. No matter how long the occupation
measures aimed at altering the demographic
lasts, it cannot lead to a transfer of sovereignty.
composition, character and status of the Holy City of
The occupying power must refrain from
Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related
exercising acts of sovereignty and remains
discriminatory legislation and measures?
bound by its initial, limited authority. The fact
that an occupation endures does not change its
(b) How do the policies and practices of Israel referred legal status under international humanitarian
to in paragraph 18 (a) above affect the legal status of law. The occupation remains a temporary
the occupation, and what are the legal consequences condition, with the occupying power’s continued
that arise for all States and the United Nations from presence subject to rules that prohibit the use
this status?” of force and uphold the right to
self-determination.

ICJ’s opinion: The Court to examine Israel’s

(a) ISRAEL’S POLICIES AND PRACTICES IN THE
OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY policies and practices, as well as its continued
presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,
A. The question of the prolonged occupation
against this background.

The question of the prolonged occupation

B. Settlement Policy
touches on the critical legal consequences that
arise from Israel's extended control over the
Occupied Palestinian Territory—a control that 1. Overview
has persisted for more than 57 years.

Since removal of Israel’s settlements from the

As an occupying power, Israel Gaza Strip in 2005, Israel’s settlement policy
assumes a set of distinct has continued in the West Bank and East
powers and responsibilities over Jerusalem The Court to limit its analysis to
the territory it controls. The Israel’s ongoing settlement policy in the West
core principle here is that Bank and East Jerusalem.
occupation is meant to be
temporary. It’s a situation
2. Transfer of civilian population
tolerated under international
law to address immediate
military needs, but it must Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
always be for the benefit of the This article prohibits an occupying power from
local population. Importantly, transferring parts of its own civilian population
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
into the territory it occupies. The Court, in its administered for the benefit of the local population,
Wall Advisory Opinion, clarified that this respectively. The Court finds that Israel’s practices
prohibition applies not only to forcible transfers contravene these regulations, as the confiscated
but also to any measures taken to organize or land benefits Israeli settlers rather than the local
encourage such transfers. Palestinian population.

Evidence of Israel’s Settlement Policy:

4. Exploitation of natural resources
● Incentives for Settlement: The Court notes
substantial evidence that Israel has been Area C, rich in resources like water and minerals,
providing incentives for Israelis to relocate has been subjected to extensive exploitation by
to the West Bank, including support for Israel. The Court observes that Israel's policies
industrial and agricultural development. prioritize the extraction and use of these resources
Legalization of Outposts: Israel has for Israeli settlements, disadvantaging the local
●
regularly retroactively legalized outposts Palestinian population.
established in violation of Israeli domestic
Principle of Permanent Sovereignty: The Court
law. For instance, in February 2023, Israel
refers to the principle of permanent sovereignty
decided to legalize ten outposts in Area C of
over natural resources, which entails that an
the West Bank.
occupying Power must respect the rights of the
ICJ’s opinion: The Court concludes that Israel’s local population over their natural resources. This
settlement activities, including the transfer and principle is violated if the occupying Power exploits
maintenance of Israeli civilians, infrastracture and resources in a manner that primarily benefits its
integration in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, own population at the expense of the local
violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. inhabitants.

Related Laws
3. Confiscation or requisitioning of land
Article 55 of the Hague Regulations: This article
requires the occupying Power to act as an
Extent of Land Expropriated: Over 2 million administrator and usufructuary of natural
dunams (about 2,000 square kilometers) of resources, meaning they must manage these
land in Area C of the West Bank have been resources responsibly and sustainably, ensuring
expropriated since 1967. This represents more they are used for the benefit of the local population
than a third of the West Bank. and not exploited beyond what is necessary for the
occupation.
Use of Confiscated Land: Much of this land has
been reclassified as State land by Israel, despite Principle 23 of the Rio Declaration: This
being private property under previous legal principle reinforces the protection of the
frameworks. This land has primarily been allocated environment and natural resources in occupied
for Israeli settlement development. territories.

Related laws
5. Extension of Israeli law
Absentee Property Law: In East Jerusalem, land
confiscation is facilitated through the Absentee Israel applied its domestic law to East Jerusalem
Property Law of 1950, which allows the confiscation starting in 1967, declaring it part of Israeli territory
of property if the owner was outside the area after through the Government and Law Procedures
November 27, 1947. Ordinance. The Basic Law of 1980 further declared
Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel,
Hague Regulations: Article 46 of the Hague excluding any foreign governance.
Regulations mandates respect for private property
and prohibits its confiscation. Articles 52 and 55 From a domestic legal perspective, Israel treats
further restrict requisitioning of property to military East Jerusalem as part of its sovereign territory,
needs and require that public property be applying its laws fully and excluding other legal
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
systems. Second Paragraph: This allows for evacuation under
specific conditions: if the safety of the population or
ICJ’s opinion: The Court finds that the extension of imperative military reasons demand it. However,
Israeli law to the West Bank and East Jerusalem such evacuations should be temporary and
does not meet the requirements of Article 64 of the reversed once the military reasons subside.
Fourth Geneva Convention.

Related laws 7. Violence against Palestinians

Article 43 of the Hague Regulations: This article

Reports from various UN bodies indicate a
mandates that an occupying Power must respect significant rise in violence by Israeli settlers
the existing laws in the occupied territory unless against Palestinians. The Secretary-General’s
absolutely prevented from doing so. The occupying reports document frequent and severe attacks
Power may only introduce new regulations essential by settlers, with inadequate response or
for maintaining order and security as per the Fourth intervention from Israeli authorities.
Geneva Convention.

Article 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: ICJ’S opinion: The Court concludes that Israel’s
This article allows the occupying Power to introduce policies and practices, including settler violence
new provisions in the occupied territory if and the excessive use of force by security
necessary to fulfill its obligations under the forces, violate international legal obligations.
Convention, maintain order, and ensure security. The systematic nature of these failures
exacerbates the coercive environment faced by
Palestinians, undermining their protection
6. Forced displacement of the Palestinian
under international humanitarian and human
population
rights law.

The term “forcible” includes not just physical

Related laws
force but also situations where the population
has no viable alternative but to leave.
Article 46 of the Hague Regulations:
Ensures the right to life for protected persons in
ICJ’S opinion: The Court finds that Israel’s
occupied territories.
policies, including extensive house demolitions,
land confiscation for settlement expansion, and
restrictions on movement, often leave Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva
Palestinians with no real choice but to leave Convention: Guarantees humane treatment
their homes. Such measures are characterized and protection against violence.
by their permanence and are not consistent
with the temporary nature of permissible
ICCPR Articles 6 and 7: Protect the rights to
evacuations under Article 49.
life and freedom from violence.

Related laws
8. Conclusion on Israel’s settlement policy

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva

Transfer by Israel of settlers to the West Bank
Convention:
and East Jerusalem, as well as maintenance of
First Paragraph: This paragraph prohibits individual their presence, contrary to sixth paragraph of
or mass forcible transfers and deportations of Article 49 of Fourth Geneva Convention
protected persons from occupied territory to any Expansion of Israel’s settlements in the West
other territory, including within the occupied Bank and East Jerusalem based on confiscation
territory itself. The prohibition is broad and applies or requisitioning of large areas of land Land
to both external and internal forcible transfers. policies of Israel not in conformity with Articles
46, 52 and 55 of Hague Regulations.
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
create irreversible changes and amount to de
facto annexation of significant parts of the
The sixth paragraph of Article 49 of the
Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Fourth Geneva Convention states: "The
Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer
parts of its own civilian population into the D. The question of discriminatory legislation
territory it occupies." and measures
1. The scope of question:
Hague Regulation, Article 46: "Family honor and
rights, the lives of persons, and private property,
as well as religious convictions and worship, must Under the terms of question (a)
be respected. Private property cannot be
confiscated." 2. The concept of discrimination

Hague Regulation, Article 52: "A military

commander may confiscate property in the Related laws
occupied territory only for military necessities and
must take care that any such action is not
Under Article 1, paragraph 3, of the United
excessive in relation to the military necessity."
Nations Charter, one of the purposes of the
United Nations is “[t]o achieve international
Hague Regulation, Article 55: "The occupying
co-operation . . . in promoting and encouraging
State shall be regarded only as an administrator
respect for human rights and for fundamental
and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate,
freedoms for all without distinction as to race,
forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the
sex, language, or religion”.
hostile State, and shall take all measures to
safeguard the capital of these properties, and to
ensure their proper maintenance." The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
also provides that “[e]veryone is entitled to all
the rights and freedoms set forth in this
C. The question of the annexation of the
Declaration, without distinction of any kind,
Occupied Palestinian Territory
such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social
Annexation, as defined by the Court, involves origin, property, birth or other status.
the forcible and permanent integration of Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on
occupied land into the territory of the the basis of the political, jurisdictional or
occupying power, which is prohibited under international status of the country or territory
international law. to which a person belongs, whether it be
independent, trust, non-self-governing or under
any other limitation of sovereignty.”
The Court distinguishes between de jure
annexation, which involves formal declarations
of sovereignty, and de facto annexation, which Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva
includes actions creating a permanent situation Convention provides: “Without prejudice to
on the ground. The ICJ examines Israel’s the provisions relating to their state of health,
policies, such as the integration of East age and sex, all protected persons shall be
Jerusalem into Israeli domestic law and the treated with the same consideration by the
expansion of settlements in the West Bank, Party to the conflict in whose power they are,
noting that these actions aim to establish without any adverse distinction based, in
permanent control and integrate the occupied particular, on race, religion or political opinion.”
areas into Israel.

Article 2, paragraph 1, of the ICCPR

ICJ’s opinion: The Court finds that these provides: “Each State Party to the present
policies and practices, including settlement Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure
expansion and infrastructure development, to all individuals within its territory and subject
to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
present Covenant, without distinction of any between Palestinians and members of other
kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, groups in relation to their enjoyment of human
religion, political or other opinion, national or rights Whether differentiation of treatment is
social origin, property, birth or other status.” nevertheless justified, in that it is reasonable
and objective and serves a legitimate public
aim. Israel’s residence permit policy amounts to
Article 26 of the same Covenant stipulates
prohibited discrimination under Articles 2,
that “[a]ll persons are equal before the law
paragraph 2, 23 and 26 ICCPR, and Articles 2,
and are entitled without any discrimination to
paragraph 2, and 10, paragraph 1, of the
the equal protection of the law. In this respect,
ICESCR Restrictions imposed by Israel on
the law shall prohibit any discrimination and
movement of Palestinians in the Occupied
guarantee to all persons equal and effective
Palestinian Territory amount to prohibited
protection against discrimination on any ground
discrimination
such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, nationalor social
origin, property, birth or other status.” 3. Residence permit policy

Israel applies its domestic law to East Jerusalem,

Article 4 of the ICCPR allows States parties treating it as part of its territory. Israeli citizens and
to take measures in derogation from some of non-Israeli Jews have unrestricted residency rights,
their obligations under that instrument subject while Palestinians in East Jerusalem must hold valid
to various conditions. Nonetheless, under the residence permits.
terms of Article 4, the measures in question
must not involve discrimination solely on the Since 1995, Palestinians need to prove their "centre
ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion, of life" remains in East Jerusalem for the past
or social origin. seven years to retain their residency. Legislative
amendments since 2008 grant the Minister for the
For its part, Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Interior broad discretion to revoke these permits,
ICESCR provides: “The States Parties to the often based on grounds such as "breach of loyalty."
present Covenant undertake to guarantee that
the rights enunciated in the present Covenant 4. Restrictions on movements
will be exercised without discrimination of any
Almost the entire Area C is designated for Israeli
kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion,
settlements or military zones. Settlers and those
political or other opinion, national or social
with entry permits can access these areas, while
origin, property, birth or other status.”
Palestinians require special permits.

Article 1, paragraph 1, of CERD provides a An extensive road network connects Israeli

definition of discrimination based on specific settlements and passes near Palestinian villages,
grounds: “In this Convention, the term ‘racial but Palestinians often face restricted or prohibited
discrimination’ shall mean any distinction, access to these roads. Notably, there are 29
exclusion, restriction or preference based on restricted roads and sections totaling approximately
race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic 58 km.
origin which has the purpose or effect of
nullifying or impairing the recognition, The wall, constructed since 2002, significantly
enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of restricts movement in areas between its segments
human rights and fundamental freedoms in the and the Green Line. Palestinians need permits or
political, economic, social, cultural or any other special arrangements to move within these areas.
field of public life.”
5. Demolition of property

Concept of discrimination The Court to Israel’s practice of house demolitions takes two
determine whether legislation adopted and main forms: demolition of property as a punitive
measures taken by Israel differentiate on, inter sanction for a criminal offence; and demolition of
alia, grounds of race, religion or ethnicity property for lack of a building permit. The Court will
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
examine each in turn. Court of Justice (ICJ) has assessed whether Israeli
policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian
Punitive Demolitions: These are executed as a Territory (OPT) impede the Palestinian right to
form of punishment for individuals accused of self-determination. Key findings include:
terrorism-related offenses. The Israeli Defense
Forces (IDF) have demolished over 2,000 1. Territorial Integrity:
properties since the beginning of the occupation for ○ Israel’s settlement expansion and
this reason (UN doc. A/HRC/44/60). annexation efforts fragment the
OPT, undermining its territorial
Demolitions for Lack of Building Permits: unity. This fragmentation prevents
These occur under Israel’s land planning system. the establishment of a cohesive
With limited land allocated for Palestinian use and a Palestinian state and impedes the
high rate of permit rejections, many Palestinians exercise of self-determination.
build without permits, leading to demolition and 2. Population Dispersal:
displacement risks. ○ Israeli policies contribute to the
displacement and fragmentation of
6. Conclusion on Israel’s discriminatory the Palestinian population, altering
legislation and measures demographic balances and
threatening the integrity of
Systemic Discrimination: Israeli policies in the Palestinian society. Restrictions on
Occupied Palestinian Territory have been found to movement and settlement policies
systematically discriminate against Palestinians. exacerbate these effects.
This discrimination is reflected in various areas 3. Natural Resources:
including legal rights, movement restrictions, and ○ Israel’s exploitation of natural
property demolitions. The treatment of resources in the OPT, including
Palestinians, compared to Israeli settlers, is water and minerals, denies
unjustified by any reasonable or objective criteria Palestinians the right to control
and violates international human rights standards, their own resources, further
specifically Articles 2(1) and 26 of the ICCPR, hindering their self-determination.
Article 2(2) of the ICESCR, and Article 2 of CERD. 4. Political and Economic Development:
○ The policies restrict Palestinian
Segregation and Apartheid: The policies and ability to determine their political
practices of Israel also suggest a form of racial status and hinder economic, social,
segregation and apartheid. Physical separation is and cultural development. The
evident through settlement expansion and occupation creates dependencies on
restricted movement, which isolates Palestinian Israel and foreign aid, impeding
communities from Israeli settlers. Juridical self-sufficiency and long-term
separation is seen in the differing legal systems development.
applied to Palestinians and settlers. These practices
align with the definitions of apartheid as outlined in Long-Term Implications: The prolonged nature
Article 3 of CERD, reflecting severe racial of these policies aggravates the violation of the
discrimination and systemic segregation. Palestinian right to self-determination. The
persistent and unlawful practices prevent
Palestinians from achieving self-determination and
E. The question of self-determination
continue to undermine their rights and future
The right of the Palestinian people to prospects.
self-determination is a fundamental principle of
The Court concludes that Israel's actions are in
international law. It is enshrined in the UN Charter
breach of its obligations under international law to
and recognized as a basic principle by various
respect the Palestinian people's right to
international resolutions. This right allows peoples
self-determination.
to freely determine their political status and pursue
economic, social, and cultural development.

Impact of Israeli Policies: The International

PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
○ Jus ad Bellum: Refers to the
legality of the use of force and the
occupation itself. It assesses
(b) EFFECTS OF ISRAEL’S POLICIES AND whether the occupation is legally
PRACTICES ON THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE justified under international law.
OCCUPATION ○ Jus in Bello: Refers to the conduct
A. The scope of the first part of question (b) of the occupying Power and the
and applicable law rights and protections applicable
during the occupation, regardless of
Scope of the Inquiry: The first part of question the legality of the occupation.
(b) from the General Assembly concerns how
Israel’s policies and practices have impacted the Conclusion: The ICJ's task is to assess how
legal status of its occupation of the Palestinian Israel’s policies and practices affect the legal status
territories. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) of its occupation based on international law
aims to determine the extent to which these principles and the UN Charter. This includes
actions have affected the legality of Israel’s evaluating whether these actions have altered the
continued presence in these territories. nature of the occupation and its legality, as
opposed to merely analyzing the conduct within the
Resolutions occupied territory.

● Security Council Resolutions:

○ Resolution 252 (1968): Declared B. The manner in which Israeli policies and
Israeli measures to change the practices affect the legal status of the
status of Jerusalem as invalid. occupation
○ Resolution 446 (1979): Urged
Impact of Israeli Policies:
Israel to reverse actions affecting
the legal status, geographical
● Extension of Sovereignty: Israeli policies
nature, and demographic
and practices have led to the extension of
composition of occupied territories.
Israeli sovereignty over parts of the
○ Resolution 465 (1980):
Occupied Palestinian Territory. This includes
Condemned Israeli settlement
the gradual annexation of territory,
policies as a violation of the Geneva
implementation of Israeli governmental
Convention and an obstruction to
functions, and the application of Israeli
peace.
laws.
● General Assembly Resolutions:
● Demographic and Territorial Changes:
○ Resolution 32/5 (1977):
These actions have altered the physical
Expressed concern over Israeli
character, legal status, and demographic
actions altering the legal status and
composition of the Occupied Palestinian
demographics of occupied
Territory, particularly in the West Bank and
territories, declaring such measures
East Jerusalem. There is an apparent
invalid.
intention to establish a permanent and
○ Resolution 70/15 (2015): Called
irreversible Israeli presence.
for Israel to cease measures that
alter the character and status of the
Legal Principles:
territories, including land
confiscation and annexation.
● Prohibition of Acquisition by Force:
○ Resolution 77/247 (2022):
According to international law and the UN
Demanded Israel end settlement
Charter, the acquisition of territory by force
activities and measures that impact
is prohibited. Occupation cannot justify the
the human rights and
annexation or acquisition of territory by the
self-determination of Palestinians.
occupying power.
● Violation of Sovereignty Principles:
Legal Distinctions:
Israel’s actions, such as asserting
sovereignty and annexing parts of the
● Jus ad Bellum vs. Jus in Bello:
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
territory, violate the prohibition against making Israel’s continued presence
acquiring territory by force. This directly unlawful.
impacts the legality of Israel’s occupation of ● Comparison to South Africa in Namibia:
the Palestinian territories. Some participants draw parallels with the
case of South Africa’s occupation of
Right to Self-Determination: Namibia, suggesting that if South Africa’s
presence was deemed illegal due to
● UN Charter and Resolutions: The violations of international law, Israel’s
principle of self-determination is enshrined situation should be similarly assessed.
in the UN Charter and General Assembly
resolutions, which obligate states to refrain Court’s Analysis:
from actions that deprive peoples of their
right to self-determination. ● Violation of International Principles: The
● Obstruction of Self-Determination: Court acknowledges that Israel’s violations
Israel’s policies, including annexation and of the prohibition against acquiring territory
territorial fragmentation, obstruct the by force and the Palestinian right to
Palestinian people’s right to self-determination impact the legality of its
self-determination. These policies impede continued presence. The persistent
the Palestinian people’s ability to utilize annexation and control exerted by Israel,
natural resources, and pursue economic, alongside the ongoing frustration of
social, and cultural development. Palestinian self-determination, breach
fundamental international principles,
Legal Consequences: rendering the occupation unlawful.
● Scope of Illegality: This illegality extends to
● Breach of Fundamental Rights: The the entire territory occupied by Israel in
prolonged denial of the Palestinian right to 1967. The Court emphasizes that the
self-determination due to Israeli policies policies and practices implemented by
constitutes a breach of this fundamental Israel have fragmented the territory and
right. This breach impacts the legality of obstructed the Palestinian people’s right to
Israel’s continued presence as an occupying self-determination.
power.
● Occupation Conditions: Occupation Consideration of Agreements:
cannot indefinitely leave an occupied
population in a state of uncertainty while ● Oslo Accords: Three participants argued
integrating parts of their territory into the that agreements between Israel and
occupying power’s own territory. The right Palestine, such as the Oslo Accords,
to self-determination is inalienable and implicitly recognize Israel’s right to
cannot be subjected to conditions imposed maintain a presence in the Occupied
by the occupying power. Palestinian Territory for security reasons.
The Court finds that these Accords do not
authorize Israel to annex parts of the
territory or maintain a permanent presence
for security purposes. The accords do not
C. The legality of the continued presence of
override the fundamental international legal
Israel in the Occupied Palestinian
principles regarding occupation and
Territory
sovereignty.

Arguments on Legality:
Ongoing Obligations:

● Permanent Changes: Many argue that

● International Responsibilities: Even though
Israel’s occupation is illegal due to its
the Court finds Israel’s continued presence
policies and practices, which have led to
unlawful, Israel remains obligated under
permanent changes in the territory’s
international law to fulfill its responsibilities
physical and demographic characteristics.
as an occupying power. This includes
This permanent alteration is seen as
adhering to the law of occupation and
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
respecting the rights of the Palestinian territory by force and the right of the
population and other states. The effective Palestinian people to self-determination.
control of a territory by a state establishes ● Immediate Action Required: Israel has
its responsibility for acts affecting the an obligation under general international
population and other states, regardless of law to end this wrongful act as swiftly as
the territory’s legal status under possible. This requirement aligns with
international law. established principles that a state
responsible for an internationally wrongful
In summary, the Court concludes that Israel’s act must cease the act and rectify the
continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian situation (as confirmed in past advisory
Territory is unlawful due to violations of opinions).
international law principles, including the
prohibition of acquiring territory by force and the 2. Cease Unlawful Policies and Practices:
right to self-determination. However, Israel remains
bound by its legal obligations towards the ● Settlement Activity: Israel must
Palestinian population and other states until its immediately halt all new settlement
presence is terminated. activities.
● Legislation and Measures: Israel is
obligated to repeal all legislation and
measures that contribute to or maintain the
LEGAL CONSEQUENCES ARISING FROM ISRAEL’S unlawful situation, including those that
POLICIES AND PRACTICES AND FROM THE discriminate against Palestinians and
ILLEGALITY OF ISRAEL’S CONTINUED PRESENCE modify the demographic composition of the
IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY
territory.

3. Obligation for Full Reparation:

The Court has found that Israel’s policies and practices
referred to in question (a) are in breach of international
● Principle of Reparation: Reparation
law. The maintenance of these policies and practices is
should aim to eliminate the consequences
an unlawful act of a continuing character entailing
of the illegal act and restore the situation to
Israel’s international responsibility.
what it would likely have been without the
wrongful act. This includes restitution,
The Court has also found in reply to the first part of compensation, and satisfaction.
question (b) that the continued presence of Israel in ○ Restitution: Israel must return
the Occupied Palestinian Territory is illegal. land and immovable property
seized since 1967, including cultural
property and assets taken from
The Court will therefore address the legal consequences Palestinians. It must also evacuate
arising from Israel’s policies and practices referred to in settlers from existing settlements
question (a) for Israel, together with those arising from and dismantle parts of the wall in
the illegality of Israel’s continued presence in the the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Occupied Palestinian Territory under question (b), for Furthermore, Palestinians displaced
Israel, for other States and for the United Nations. during the occupation must be
allowed to return to their homes.
○ Compensation: If restitution is
A. Legal consequences for Israel
materially impossible, Israel must
1. Obligation to End the Illegal Presence: compensate all affected individuals
and populations for material
● Wrongful Act: The Court has determined damage resulting from its wrongful
that Israel’s continued presence in the acts.
Occupied Palestinian Territory is a wrongful
act that engages its international 4. Continuing Obligations:
responsibility. This act is characterized by
violations of the prohibition on acquiring ● Respect for Rights and Laws: Israel
remains bound by its international
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
obligations, including the respect for resolutions 74/11 (2019) and 77/126.
Palestinian self-determination and ● Aid and Assistance: States are prohibited
compliance with international humanitarian from aiding or assisting illegal settlement
and human rights law. The recognition of activities or recognizing Israeli sovereignty
the ongoing duty to adhere to these over occupied territories. This also includes
obligations underscores that ending the abstaining from any trade, investment, or
wrongful act does not negate Israel’s economic dealings that may support or
responsibilities under international law. entrench Israel’s unlawful presence in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The Court’s findings emphasize that Israel must not
only cease its illegal activities and practices but 4. Distinguishing Dealings with Israel:
also provide reparations for the harm caused. This
comprehensive approach ensures that the ● Diplomatic and Economic Relations:
consequences of the wrongful acts are addressed, States must distinguish between Israel’s
and the rights of the Palestinian people are own territory and the Occupied Palestinian
respected. Territory in their dealings. This involves:
○ Avoiding treaty relations that imply
representation or action on behalf
B. Legal consequences for the other states of the Occupied Palestinian
Territory.
1. Obligations Related to Erga Omnes Duties:
○ Avoiding economic or trade
relations with Israel that concern
● Nature of Obligations: The Court has
the Occupied Palestinian Territory
identified that Israel’s violations of the right
or its parts.
of the Palestinian people to
○ Ensuring that diplomatic missions
self-determination and the prohibition on
and engagements do not recognize
acquiring territory by force involve
Israel’s illegal presence in the
obligations erga omnes, which are owed by
Occupied Palestinian Territory.
all States. These obligations are of
○ Preventing trade or investment that
significant importance and all States have a
supports the maintenance of the
legal interest in their enforcement.
illegal situation created by Israel.

2. Obligations to Support International Action:

5. Ensuring Compliance with International
Law:
● Promotion of Self-Determination:
States are obligated to cooperate with the
● Ending Impediments to
United Nations to implement measures that
Self-Determination: States must work to
ensure the end of Israel’s illegal presence
remove any impediments to the Palestinian
and the realization of Palestinian
people’s exercise of their right to
self-determination. This duty includes
self-determination resulting from Israel’s
promoting and assisting in the application
illegal presence.
of the principle of equal rights and
● Respect for International Humanitarian
self-determination (as per General
Law: States party to the Fourth Geneva
Assembly resolution 2625).
Convention have a responsibility to ensure
that Israel complies with international
3. Non-Recognition and Non-Assistance:
humanitarian law, as set out in the
Convention, while respecting the Charter of
● Recognition of Borders: States must not
the United Nations and international law.
recognize any changes to the borders or
the status of territories occupied by Israel
In summary, the Court’s findings impose significant
since 1967, including Jerusalem, unless
obligations on States to avoid recognizing or
agreed upon by the parties through
supporting the illegal situation resulting from
negotiations. This is consistent with
Israel’s actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Security Council resolutions 465 (1980) and
States must cooperate with international bodies to
2334 (2016), and General Assembly
uphold Palestinian self-determination and ensure
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Atty. Cabasag | UE College of Law (2024-2025)
______________________________________________________________________________________________
compliance with international law, reflecting a do not support or perpetuate the unlawful situation
broad responsibility to address and mitigate the in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
effects of Israel’s unlawful presence.

C. Legal consequences for the United Nations

1. Duty of Non-Recognition:

● Application to International
Organizations: The duty of
non-recognition of the unlawful situation
arising from Israel’s presence in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory extends to
international organizations, including the
United Nations. This duty reflects the
serious nature of the breaches of
obligations erga omnes under international
law.

2. General Assembly Resolutions:

● Previous Calls: The General Assembly has

previously called upon international
organizations and specialized agencies not
to recognize, cooperate with, or assist any
measures undertaken by Israel that exploit
the resources of the occupied territories or
effect changes in their demographic
composition, geographic character, or
institutional structure (e.g., resolution
32/161 (1977)).

3. Obligations of the United Nations:

● Non-Recognition and Distinction: In line

with the obligations under international law,
the United Nations is required to:
○ Not Recognize: The UN must not
recognize as legal the situation
created by Israel’s unlawful
presence in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory.
○ Distinguish Dealings: The UN
must make a clear distinction in its
dealings between Israel’s own
territory and the Occupied
Palestinian Territory. This distinction
ensures that the UN does not
inadvertently support or legitimize
the illegal status quo.

These measures underscore the United Nations'

role in adhering to and upholding international law,
particularly in ensuring that its actions and policies