ICJ, den internasjonale domstolen for menneskerettigheter, konkluderte den 19. july 2024 med at okkupasjonen av de palestinske territoriene er ulovlig i henhold til internasjonale lover og regler. Rapporten er en juridisk uttalelse til FN slik som ønsket i FN resolusjonen 77/247 som sterkt fordømte okkupasjonen og måten palestinere påføres skader som følge av apartheid-regimet. Det er verdt å merke at denne resolusjonen ble godkjent i FNs general forsamling den 30. desember 2022. Uttalelsen er en sterk indikasjon på hvilke rettslige forpliktelser FNs medlemsland har mtp. folkeretten. ^[1].

Rapporten

Pressemeldingen fra ICJ:
International Court of Justice, case 186

Direktelenke til ICJ-rapporten:
186-20240719-sum-01-00-en.pdf

Pressemeldinger fra humanitære organisasjoner:

Amnesty International

Amnesty International

---

Utdrag om historikk i ICJ-uttalelsen:

Side 4: Generell kontekst - Historikk 1918 - 1948 (paragraf 1 og 2):
Having been part of the Ottoman Empire, at the end of the First World War, Palestine was placed under a Mandate that was entrusted to Great Britain by the League of Nations. In 1947, the United Kingdom announced its intention to complete its evacuation of the mandated territory by 1 August 1948, subsequently advancing that date to 15 May 1948. In the meantime, on 29 November 1947, the General Assembly had adopted resolution 181 (II) on the future government of Palestine, which “[r]ecommend[ed] to the United Kingdom … and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation … of the Plan of Partition” of the territory, as set forth in the resolution, between two independent States, one Arab, the other Jewish, as well as the creation of a special international régime for the City of Jerusalem. While the Jewish population accepted the Plan of Partition, the Arab population of Palestine and the Arab States rejected this plan, contending, inter alia, that it was unbalanced.
On 14 May 1948, Israel proclaimed its independence with reference to the General Assembly resolution 181 (II); an armed conflict then broke out between Israel and a number of Arab States, and the Plan of Partition was not implemented. By resolution 62 (1948) of 16 November 1948, the Security Council decided that “an armistice shall be established in all sectors of Palestine”. In conformity with this decision, general armistice agreements were concluded in 1949 in Rhodes between Israel and its neighbouring States through mediation by the United Nations, fixing the armistice demarcation lines between Israeli and Arab forces (often later collectively called the “Green Line” owing to the colour used for it on maps).

Side 5: Generell kontekst - 6-dagers krigen i 1967 (paragraf 2-5):
In 1967, an armed conflict (also known as the “Six-Day War”) broke out between Israel and neighbouring countries Egypt, Syria and Jordan. By the time hostilities had ceased, Israeli forces occupied all the territories of Palestine under British Mandate beyond the Green Line. On 22 November 1967, the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 242 (1967), which “emphasiz[ed] the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by war” and called for the “[w]ithdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. From 1967 onwards, Israel started to establish or support settlements in the territories it occupied and took a number of measures aimed at changing the status of the City of Jerusalem. The Security Council, after recalling on a number of occasions “the principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, condemned those measures and, by resolution 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971, confirmed that
“all legislative and administrative actions taken by Israel to change the status of the City of Jerusalem, including expropriation of land and properties, transfer of populations and legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied section, are totally invalid and cannot change that status”.

Side 5: Generell kontekst - Palestinsk selvstyre (paragraf 7 og 9)
On 14 October 1974, the General Assembly recognized, by resolution 3210 (XXIX), the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) as the representative of the Palestinian people. By resolution 3236 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974, it recognized “that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations”.
…
On 15 November 1988, referring to resolution 181 (II) “which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State”, the PLO “proclaim[ed] the establishment of the State of Palestine”.

Side 6 - Staten Palestina kvalifiseres til et medlemskap i FN av FNs generalforsamling (paragraf 6):
On 10 May 2024, the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/23 in which it “[d]etermines that the State of Palestine is qualified for membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations and should therefore be admitted to membership in the United Nations”.

Utdrag fra konklusjoner i ICJ-uttalelsen:

Side 13 - Ulovlig anneksering, bosettelse og tyveri av naturlige ressurser:
Having examined Israel’s policies and practices, both in relation to East Jerusalem and to the West Bank, with a view to determining whether they amount to annexation, the Court comes to the conclusion that Israel’s policies and practices, including the maintenance and expansion of settlements, the construction of associated infrastructure, and the wall, the exploitation of natural resources, the proclamation of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the comprehensive application of Israeli domestic law in East Jerusalem and its extensive application in the West Bank, entrench Israel’s control of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, notably of East Jerusalem and of Area C of the West Bank. These policies and practices are designed to remain in place indefinitely and to create irreversible effects on the ground. Consequently, the Court considers that these policies and practices amount to annexation of large parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It is the view of the Court that to seek to acquire sovereignty over an occupied territory, as shown by the policies and practices adopted by Israel in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, is contrary to the prohibition of the use of force in international relations and its corollary principle of the non-acquisition of territory by force.

Side 14 - Diskriminerende lovgiving og behandling av palestinere:
The Court concludes from the evidence presented to it and on the basis of its analysis that a broad array of legislation adopted and measures taken by Israel in its capacity as an occupying Power treat Palestinians differently on grounds specified by international law. The Court notes that this differentiation of treatment cannot be justified with reference to reasonable and objective criteria nor to a legitimate public aim. Accordingly, the Court is of the view that the régime of comprehensive restrictions imposed by Israel on Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory constitutes systemic discrimination based on, inter alia, race, religion or ethnic origin, in violation of Articles 2, paragraph 1, and 26 of the ICCPR, Article 2, paragraph 2, of the ICESCR, and Article 2 of CERD.

Side 16 - Okkupasjonen er ulovlig:
The Court is of the view that Israel’s assertion of sovereignty and its annexation of certain parts of the territory constitute a violation of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force. This violation has a direct impact on the legality of Israel’s continued presence, as an occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Court considers that Israel is not entitled to sovereignty over or to exercise sovereign powers in any part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory on account of its occupation. Nor can Israel’s security concerns override the principle of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force.

Side 16 - Fortsatte okkupasjonen og frarøvelse av palestinere rett til selvbestemmelse er ulovlig:
The Court considers that the violations by Israel of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force and of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination have a direct impact on the legality of the continued presence of Israel, as an occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The sustained abuse by Israel of its position as an occupying Power, through annexation and an assertion of permanent control over the Occupied Palestinian Territory and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and renders Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory unlawful.

This illegality relates to the entirety of the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel in 1967. This is the territorial unit across which Israel has imposed policies and practices to fragment and frustrate the ability of the Palestinian people to exercise its right to self-determination, and over large swathes of which it has extended Israeli sovereignty in violation of international law.

Side 17 - Okkupasjonen må stanses umiddelbart:
It is a wrongful act of a continuing character which has been brought about by Israel’s violations, through its policies and practices, of the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. Consequently, Israel has an obligation to bring an end to its presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible.

Side 17 - Diskriminerende lovgivning må opphøre umiddelbart:
Israel also has an obligation to repeal all legislation and measures creating or maintaining the unlawful situation, including those which discriminate against the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as well as all measures aimed at modifying the demographic composition of any parts of the territory.

Side 18 - Rettslige forpliktelser til FNs medlemsland - alle må bidra til å stanse all aktivitet som opprettholder okkupasjonen:
Moreover, the Court considers that, in view of the character and importance of the rights and obligations involved, all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It is for all States, while respecting the Charter of the United Nations and international law, to ensure that any impediment resulting from the illegal presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory to the exercise of the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end. In addition, all the States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention have the obligation, while respecting the Charter of the United Nations and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention.

---