HOME | DD
poderiu — Never Forgive Never Forget
[NSFW]
Published: 2010-12-27 00:30:01 +0000 UTC; Views: 4979; Favourites: 33; Downloads: 49
Redirect to original
Description
...Related content
Comments: 130
Ah yes, the Israel-Palestine conflict. A war that truely has no good guys, just bad and worse. Who is bad and Worse depend on who you are though. An interesting photo highlighting Israels often heavy handed response to Militant raids. It is good to see some art on Operation Cast Lead, an oft overlooked operation by the Israeli government
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The expression you use "heavy handed" to describe the terrorist atrocities comited by Israel that destroyed hospitals, schools, police stations, and killed apro. 1600 civilians in Gaza is just hillarious.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Keep in mind that Hamas and other terrorist groups use the hospitals and schools as bases to launch attacks from, as they know the Lefts reaction will be noting short of disgust.
A brilliantly evil ploy to discredit Israel, wouldn't you agree?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You are just reproducing Israeli propaganda crap. Honestly, I am tyred of reading the same old victimizing propaganda stated by a terrorist and lunatic state like Israel and its supporters.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You don't think Hamas it groups like them, who are hopelessly outnumbered and outgunned by the IDF wouldn't use every single advantage they have to win? that is exactly what I would do in their situation. why? Because it would be practical, A destroyed hospital is going to get a lot more coverage than dead Hamas fighters. and lets face it, Hamas could use some positive attention right about now, before the IDF gets tired of them and goes from retalitory bombings right back to military occupation
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Who told you that this military terrorist massacre in Gaza was held because of Hamas? Where you read that?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade, supported by hamas.
They also hang anyone they believe helps Israel
[link]
Shot a defencless police officer
[link]
Repeated suicide bombings
(no link, sorry)
Deny the holocaust ever occured
"This conference bears a clear Zionist goal, aimed at forging history by hiding the truth about the so-called Holocaust, which is an alleged and invented story with no basis. (...) The invention of these grand illusions of an alleged crime that never occurred, ignoring the millions of dead European victims of Nazism during the war, clearly reveals the racist Zionist face, which believes in the superiority of the Jewish race over the rest of the nations. (...) By these methods, the Jews in the world flout scientific methods of research whenever that research contradicts their racist interests"
-Mohammed Deif
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow very powerful image ..... and the civilian casualties ..... it just break my heart =[
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Until this war:
Killed Palestinians - 2,500
Killed Israelis - 4,300
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Where did you get those numbers, from Mars? You mention stuff without point sources?! Those numbers are just ludicrous, your comment will be just fine here and people would have a good laugh, for sure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay, so it's not ludicrous that Israeli kill Palestinians, and the Palestinians are doing nothing?!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I never said palestinians don´t do nothing. Are you going to tell me were you get those numbers, or not?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes. I'm serving in the IDF in the Intelligence. I know Arabic and other languages. I perticipated in the Gaza War. I got it from official protocols of the Government and the Military.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Are you waiting that people believe your lying government? Of course thouse numbers are false. Do you expect a terrorist state like Israel tells the truth about its ethnic cleansing?
"Gaza War"? There was no "Gaza war". Even formers IDF souldiers testimonies tell the truth about the situation. There was no war, there was a massacre and other israeli terrorist acts like shooting ambulances, destroying mosks, destroying civilian houses, factories, hospitals and schools. "You feel like an infantile little kid with a magnifying glass looking at ants, burning them," said a former IDF soldier about "Gaza Operation" source: [link]
About the numbers, of course your government lies and keeps lying. Acording to United Nations - 1,133 Israelis (indcluding IDF) and an estimated 5,144 Palestinians (including 952 children) have been killed since September 2000. From UN data, the post-1967 avoidable mortality (excess mortality) in the Occupied Palestinian Territories totals 300,000 and the post-1967 under-5 infant mortality 183,000 (of which 90% has been avoidable) - as compared to 2,178 post-1967 Israeli terrorism deaths (Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs figures).
Source: [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay.
First, if you don't want to call it the "Gaza War" so let's call it by the true name "Operation Oferet Yetzuka".
Okay, those could be the numbers. I can see that your all about sources.
I just want to make something clear: The intention to attack Gaza wasn't because of some Bloodthirst for Palestinian blood, or out alleged hatered for humanity, but to liberate Gilad Shalit from Palestinian captivity. This was the only goal. Yes, Palestinian civillians were killed in the Operation, but, sorry to tun away to fault, it's only because of Hamas, that kidnaped Gilad and provoked Israel to attack the Gaza Strip.
Until the Operation, no Palestinian civillians were killed at all. In fact, Palestinian killed Israelis in the past 2 Intifadas.
Please I do not wish to fight anymore. I do agree to a Palestinian state, but only in acceptble borders for both sides (Israel and Palestine), the Palestine will abandon Terrorism and recognise Israel as a Jewish state.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The reasons for blocking Gaza (not allowing medicins, food, their own water, to come in) has to do with one israeli goal: to cause suffering to gaza people and to force their expeling. In fact ISrael State also cause suffering to palestinians from the West Bank but uses other strateggies.
Can you read what you say and just try to be serious? You claim Gilad Shalit was the reason for invading Gaza in "Operation Cast Lead" 2008/09 because he was "kidnaped". That is not the true justification for ISraeli invasion is Gaza, but even if it was the truth justification, you may forget that ISraeli government has hundereds of palestinians kidnaped. On May 15 2011, 20 palestinians were kidnaped in East Jerusalem. So, according to your standard, Israel should have a proporcinal "treatment" that gazians had in 2008/09, and maybe should be killed about 30,000 israelis? But of course you will say, "every civilians kidnaped by Israel are terrorists", right?
Isarel has no legitimacy in claiming international law, because it´s a country that breaks the law on a ongoing basis. I will not quote, like you do, Israeli propaganda sources. What says the International Court of Justice or the UN Charter?
"Gaza Wall is ilegal"
(...) "Conquering Palestinan territory by War"
"400.000 israeli settlements in Palestinian territory"
East Jerusalem, Gaza and West Bank are “occupied Palestinain Territories”
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay, so the name "Judea and Samaria" are Arab? Or Jewish? If they are Arab, let them take it, but it it's Jewish, comeone who your kidding?!
Israel kidnaped no Palestinians no where! Israel only locked up (after trial) murders of Israelis (Such as the murdered in the Fogel Massacre [link] [link] [link] [link] )
After the Goldstone Report was filed, EVERYONE knew it's wrong, then, the Goldstone committee backed down from their claims, and announced that all that Israel has done in "Operation Oferet Yetzuka" was legal, and no Palestinian territories were taken, or Palestinian civillians were killed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Judea and Samaria" was the name of one of the administrative districts of the British Mandate of Palestine. What ISrael and the British Mandate determine is not important, they are not law authorities.
The International Court of Justice is the supreme law authority internationaly. Israel must obey de International Law, like other normal countries do, respect the 1967 borders, STOP "Conquering Palestinan territory by War", STOP "400.000 israeli settlements in Palestinian territory" and STOP "occupying palestinian territories" such as East Jerusalem, Gaza and West Bank. The "Gaza Wall is also a flagrant violation of international law.
You continue to use biased sources, such as your government or even IDF, and now you use your images from deviantart? If you want to be serious do use trustable sources such as Amnisty International, Human Rights Watch or B´Tselem, and you will understand that comparing death civilians, kidnaped people, death children between both sides (Israel and PAlestine), insfrastructures destructions, poverty, suffering, and there will appear data that do show a massive asymmetry between both, ISrael and Palestine.
Now, lets just end this once and for all. Can you tell me were did Richard Goldstone told in his report or after the report that the "Operation Cast Lead" "was legal" and can you show me in the report, or after, where he states that "no Palestinian civillians were killed"?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You do have a problem with your sources. You send me a source called "IsraellyCool" and the "Guardian"? What will be next, Fox News or Zionist propaganda?
Anyway, I lost 10 minutes and read carefuly what you have send, both sources. There isn´t any mention by Richard Goldstone or even by the authors of the articles that deny the ammount of victims in both sides. You failled to prove that "Operation Cast Lead" "was legal" under international law, and particularly you failed to prove the impossible: that "no Palestinian civillians were killed". Only a mad person can say such kind of stupidity, even Israeli government has their biased count of more then 1200 gazians killed.
The jew judge Richard Goldstone, Amnisty International, Human Rights Watch,B´tselem, they all have similar numbers, they all agree Israel commited acts of terrorism against civilian targets ans civilian population; they all agree Israel commited crimes against humanity; they all agree Israel should stop the building of settelments in occupyed palestinian territory; they all agree Israel should lift the Gaza blockade; they all agree that according to international law, Israel has the obligation to recognize East Jerusalem has palestinian territory.
Why don´t your feet back on land, read a non propaganda sources, like Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch, Haretz read UN Charter, etc., about that and other events that envolve ISrael and Palestine conflict?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
don't lose your time dear, is a stupid troll on this site with multiple account to organize a stupid war in september on deviantart
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Even this "troll" need to stop lying and using lying sources. In this discussions, outside people can realize the type of propaganda "trools" like this use. I can be educational, I think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hope so... but trust me... hi leave a comment on every single deviantation on our group...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think we must insist and be pacient in descontructing this and other kind of propaganda. What do you mean? He leaves a comment on every deviation on our group?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
if you ceck every deviantation (poster etc.) in Support-Gaza-Aqsa....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yes, the guy is everywhere. But he is not very bright.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It's incredible about how many people I've seen try to make Israel out into some delicate victime when they recieve billions of dollars in aid every year from the United States.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Somebody once compared the Israeli Palestine conflict to a hypothetical scenario where Mexico fired rockets at the United States and Uncle Sam was forced to attack. To make that Accurate, the US would first have to invade large parts of Mexico and attempt to claim that God wanted the US to rule over all of North America and evict the Mexicans.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What Israel does in one year towards Palestine, Uncle Sam does in one hour. But yes, I understand the comparison.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
How many Jews killed by Arabs since 1948. More important, how many Arabs killed by Arabs since then?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If you make an accounton how many arabs and jews were killed since 1948 you will realize much more arabes, particularly palestinians were killed by israel.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The King of Jordan killed 20k Palestinians in one month. Soon after Assad killed 20k Arabs in Hamma... that alone is more than Israel killed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Look are the terrorist state of Israel, there are lots of humanitarian crimes, not only against Palestine but also against Lebanon.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hafas Al-Asad killed 20,000 people in one day in Hama.
Saddam Hussein killed 5,000 in one day in Kurdistan.
King Hussein of Jordan killed 25,000 during Black September.
150,000 killed in Lebanese civil war, started by Syrian-supported Palestinians.
Why won't you talk about that?
Demonstrate against HAMAS, BAATH, the Congo war bands, the Ayatollah regime, the North Korean communist party with its gas chambers and death camps, the Jenhaweed who kill 400,000 people in a year... why Israel? 22,000 Israelis were killed by Arabs in the last 60 years? why don't you protest against their murder?
Why must you focus in a tiny state defending itself from hundreds of millions of Arabs and Persians?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
This picture is very specific and you never mentioned the massacre commited by Israel towards Gaza? I am speaking about ISrael and you mention other countries? Why? It looks like you just want to deflect criticism towards Israel...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
These are Arabs, the so-called enemies of Israel...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No.
This are palestinians, victims of the war crimes and ilegal occupation in palestinian territory by Israel.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There is no such thing as "Palestinians." Palestinians are homeless Arabs.
Same homeless Arabs were killed in much greater numbers by Jordanians and Lebanese (Remember black September?)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
According to international law there are palestinians and "Palestine" has a defined territory that Israel is stealing litle by litle.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
According to international law there is also Israel, whose existence Palestinians don't acknowledge and whom most Arabs want to destroy.
And don't talk to me about "stealing" any Arab outside Arabia is "stealing" land. Right now, it seems they've stolen 22 countries...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Is truth that the Arab League does not recognize Israel due to the fact that Israel commits constant crimes towards Palestine. But there is no arab countrie that steals israeli territory, like Israel does to Palestine.
And, again, you keep focus other countries to deflect Israel crimes towards Palestine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No deflection here. You accuse Israel while you yourself is a million times worse. Don't we have the right to defend our good name from your lies?
So, you want to talk about stolen land? Very well.
Get out of the 22+ countries you have stolen from the natives - from Morocco, Algier, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Tunisia... Why are there Arabs in all those countries? Because they stole them from the native peoples!
Go back to Arabia. All of you. Then talk to me about Palestine. Sorry, Filistin. You can't pronounce this word in Arabic, can you? No "P" in your language. Funny Arabs can't pronounce the name of their own homeland, eh?
Ah and pray tell - why is Israel the Palestinians' land but Jordan isn't? Both were "Palestine" until recently...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
1640 palestinians, 300 children, never died in 2008/2009 in Gaza? Other civil targets like hospitals, mosks, schools in gaza weren´t bombed in Gaza? Isn´t the blockade in Gaza ilegal under international law? Aren´t the 400.000 israeli settlements in palestinian occupyed territory ilegal under the international law? Doesn´t east Jerusalem "occupyed palestinian territory" belongs to Palestine?
Lies? what lies? Did Amnisty International lie? Did Human Rights Watch lie? Did B´tselem lie? Did the jew judge Richard Goldstone lie?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Didn't Gazans kill 1,201 innocent civilians in Israel with rockets and suicide bombings? Didn't they target schools, homes, clubs, buses?
Isn't declaring the destruction of Israel illegal under international law. Aren't there more than a million Arabs living in the heart of Israel, in the part not given to them by the UN?
Doesn't Algeria belong to the Berbers?
And I didn't say anything about lies, you're confusing me with someone else.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Some arabs live among israelis, but that doesn´t mean that arabs are occupying Israel.
Where you get that "Gazans kill 1,201 innocent civilians?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Your precious Amnesty and B'tselem.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
B´tselem is from Israel, is more yours then mine. When? Why don´t you show me that "fact"? Where is the source?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Unlike you, I can actually show the source: [link]
You used B'tselem as a source earlier, so I don't see a reason why won't I.
Also, this wiki page has a full list of Israeli casualties since 1948, sources can be found below.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
B´tselem is a good source, I have nothing against B´tselem. I saw the numbers and I haven´t saw nothing that said the numbers you point before.
Actually, this numbers are amazing and there is a big gap between the casualties:
Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces (2000-2011): TOTAL - 6330+69= 6399
Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians (2000-2011): TOTAL - 243+496=739
------------------------------------------------------
Now, the law: What does the International Court of Justice says in Advisory Opinion launched in 2004?
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
Advisory Opinion
The Court finds that the construction by Israel of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory and its associated régime are contrary to international law; it states
the legal consequences arising from that illegality
THE HAGUE, 9 July 2004. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), principal judicial organ of the United Nations, has today rendered its Advisory Opinion in the case concerning the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (request for advisory opinion).
In its Opinion, the Court finds unanimously that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the United Nations General Assembly and decides by fourteen votes to one to comply with that request.
The Court responds to the question as follows:
- “A. By fourteen votes to one,
The construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law”;
- “B. By fourteen votes to one,
Israel is under an obligation to terminate its breaches of international law; it is under an obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to dismantle forthwith the structure therein situated, and to repeal or render ineffective forthwith all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto, in accordance with paragraph 151 of this Opinion”;
- “C. By fourteen votes to one,
Israel is under an obligation to make reparation for all damage caused by the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem”;
- “D. By thirteen votes to two,
All States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction; all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 have in addition the obligation, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention”;
- “E. By fourteen votes to one,
The United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and the associated régime, taking due account of the present Advisory Opinion.”
Reasoning of the Court
The Advisory Opinion is divided into three parts: jurisdiction and judicial propriety; legality of the construction by Israel of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; legal consequences of the breaches found.
Jurisdiction of the Court and judicial propriety
The Court states that when it is seised of a request for an advisory opinion, it must first consider whether it has jurisdiction to give that opinion. It finds that the General Assembly, which requested the opinion by resolution ES‑10/14 of 8 December 2003, is authorized to do so by Article 96, paragraph 1, of the Charter.
The Court, as it has sometimes done in the past, then gives certain indications as to the relationship between the question on which the advisory opinion is requested and the activities of the General Assembly. It finds that the General Assembly, in requesting an advisory opinion from the Court, did not exceed its competence, as qualified by Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter, which provides that, while the Security Council is exercising its functions in respect of any dispute or situation, the Assembly must not make any recommendation with regard thereto unless the Security Council so requests.
The Court further refers to the fact that the General Assembly adopted resolution ES‑10/14 during its Tenth Emergency Special Session, convened pursuant to resolution 377A (V), which provides that if the Security Council fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the General Assembly may consider the matter immediately with a view to making recommendations to Member States. The Court finds that the conditions laid down by that resolution were met when the Tenth Emergency Special Session was convened; that was in particular true when the General Assembly decided to request an opinion, as the Security Council was at that time unable to adopt a resolution concerning the construction of the wall as a result of the negative vote of a permanent member.
The Court then rejects the argument that an opinion could not be given in the present case on the ground that the question posed in the request is not a legal one.
Having established its jurisdiction, the Court considers the propriety of giving the requested opinion. It recalls that the lack of consent by a State to its contentious jurisdiction has no bearing on its jurisdiction to give an advisory opinion. It adds that the giving of an opinion would not have the effect, in the present case, of circumventing the principle of consent to judicial settlement, given that the question on which the General Assembly requested an opinion is located in a much broader frame of reference than that of the bilateral dispute between Israel and Palestine, and that it is of direct concern to the United Nations. Nor does the Court accept the contention that it should decline to give the advisory opinion requested because its opinion could impede a political, negotiated solution to the Israeli‑Palestinian conflict. It further finds it has before it sufficient information and evidence to enable it to give its opinion, and emphasizes that it is for the General Assembly to assess the usefulness of that opinion. The Court concludes from the foregoing that there is no compelling reason precluding it from giving the requested opinion.
Legality of the construction by Israel of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
Before addressing the legal consequences of the construction of the wall (the term which the General Assembly has chosen to use and which is also used in the Opinion, since the other expressions sometimes employed are no more accurate if understood in the physical sense), the Court considers whether or not the construction of the wall is contrary to international law.
The Court determines the rules and principles of international law which are relevant to the question posed by the General Assembly. The Court begins by citing, with reference to Article 2, paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter and to General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), the principles of the prohibition of the threat or use of force and the illegality of any territorial acquisition by such means, as reflected in customary international law. It further cites the principle of self‑determination of peoples, as enshrined in the Charter and reaffirmed by resolution 2625 (XXV). As regards international humanitarian law, the Court refers to the provisions of the Hague Regulation of 1907, which have become part of customary law, as well as the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 1949, applicable in those Palestinian territories which before the armed conflict of 1967 lay to the east of the 1949 Armistice demarcation line (or “Green Line”) and were occupied by Israel during that conflict. The Court further notes that certain human rights instruments (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child) are applicable in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The Court ascertains whether the construction of the wall has violated the above‑mentioned rules and principles. It first observes that the route of the wall as fixed by the Israeli Government includes within the “Closed Area” (between the wall and the “Green Line”) some 80 percent of the settlers living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Recalling that the Security Council described Israel's policy of establishing settlements in that territory as a “flagrant violation” of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Court finds that those settlements have been established in breach of international law. It further considers certain fears expressed to it that the route of the wall will prejudge the future frontier between Israel and Palestine; it considers that the construction of the wall and its associated régime “create a ‘fait accompli' on the ground that could well become permanent, in which case, . . . [the construction of the wall] would be tantamount to de facto annexation”. The Court notes that the route chosen for the wall gives expression in loco to the illegal measures taken by Israel, and deplored by the Security Council, with regard to Jerusalem and the settlements, and that it entails further alterations to the demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It finds that the “construction [of the wall], along with measures taken previously, . . . severely impedes the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self‑determination, and is therefore a breach of Israel's obligation to respect that right”.
The Court then considers the information furnished to it regarding the impact of the construction of the wall on the daily life of the inhabitants of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (destruction or requisition of private property, restrictions on freedom of movement, confiscation of agricultural land, cutting‑off of access to primary water sources, etc.). It finds that the construction of the wall and its associated régime are contrary to the relevant provisions of the Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention; that they impede the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; and that they also impede the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Lastly, the Court finds that this construction and its associated régime, coupled with the establishment of settlements, are tending to alter the demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and thereby contravene the Fourth Geneva Convention and the relevant Security Council resolutions.
The Court observes that certain humanitarian law and human rights instruments include qualifying clauses or provisions for derogation which may be invoked by States parties, inter alia where military exigencies or the needs of national security or public order so require. It states that it is not convinced that the specific course Israel has chosen for the wall was necessary to attain its security objectives and, holding that none of such clauses are applicable, finds that the construction of the wall constitutes “breaches by Israel of various of its obligations under the applicable international humanitarian law and human rights instruments”.
In conclusion, the Court considers that Israel cannot rely on a right of self‑defence or on a state of necessity in order to preclude the wrongfulness of the construction of the wall. The Court accordingly finds that the construction of the wall and its associated régime are contrary to international law.
Legal consequences of the violations found
The Court draws a distinction between the legal consequences of these violations for Israel and those for other States.
In regard to the former, the Court finds that Israel must respect the right of the Palestinian people to self‑determination and its obligations under humanitarian law and human rights law. Israel must also put an end to the violation of its international obligations flowing from the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and must accordingly cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall, dismantle forthwith those parts of that structure situated within the Occupied Palestinian Territory and forthwith repeal or render ineffective all legislative and regulatory acts adopted with a view to construction of the wall and establishment of its associated régime, except in so far as such acts may continue to be relevant for compliance by Israel with its obligations in regard to reparation. Israel must further make reparation for all damage suffered by all natural or legal persons affected by the wall's construction.
As regards the legal consequences for other States, the Court finds that all States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction. The Court further finds that it is for all States, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from the construction of the wall, in the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self‑determination is brought to an end. In addition, all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention are under an obligation, while respecting the Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention.
Finally, the Court is of the view that the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and its associated régime, taking due account of the present Advisory Opinion.
The Court concludes by stating that the construction of the wall must be placed in a more general context. In this regard, the Court notes that Israel and Palestine are “under an obligation scrupulously to observe the rules of international humanitarian law”. In the Court's view, the tragic situation in the region can be brought to an end only through implementation in good faith of all relevant Security Council resolutions. The Court further draws the attention of the General Assembly to the “need for . . . efforts to be encouraged with a view to achieving as soon as possible, on the basis of international law, a negotiated solution to the outstanding problems and the establishment of a Palestinian State, existing side by side with Israel and its other neighbours, with peace and security for all in the region”.
Composition of the Court
The Court was composed as follows: Judge Shi, President; Judge Ranjeva, Vice‑President; Judges Guillaume, Koroma, Vereshchetin, Higgins, Parra‑Aranguren, Kooijmans, Rezek, Al‑Khasawneh, Buergenthal, Elaraby, Owada, Simma and Tomka; Registrar Couvreur.
Judges Koroma, Higgins, Kooijmans and Al‑Khasawneh append separate opinions to the Advisory Opinion. Judge Buergenthal appends a declaration. Judges Elaraby and Owada append separate opinions.
__________
A summary of the Advisory Opinion is published in the document entitled “Summary No. 2004/2”, to which summaries of the declaration and separate opinions appended to the Advisory Opinion are attached. This Press Communiqué, the summary of the Advisory Opinion and the latter's full text can also be accessed on the Court's website by clicking on “Docket” and “Decisions” (www.icj-cij.org).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>