Anticipating ICJ's Opinion On Israel's Occupation: What To Expect On July 19? | Dawn News English
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 сен 2024
- The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to deliver its Advisory Opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, on Friday, July 19, 2024, at 3 pm in The Hague.
This highly anticipated opinion comes in response to a request for an advisory opinion and may have significant implications for the region.
Watch as legal expert, Ms. Ayesha Malik from the Conflict Law Centre, discusses the court's opinion could have far-reaching consequences for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and may shed light on the legal responsibilities of states and international organizations in addressing the situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dawn News English is your window into the latest news, insight, and features from South Asia and beyond.
Official Facebook: / dawndotcom
Official Twitter: / dawn_com
Website: www.dawn.com
Official Instagram: / dawnnewsenglish
#illegaloccupation #israel #gaza #westbank #palestine #israelhamaswar #apartheid #ayeshamalik #conflictlawcentre #explainer #explained #icj #internationalcourtofjustice #news #latestnews #dawnnewsenglish #dawnnews
Hope that tomorrow decision from ICJ will be the honest one and finally Palestinians will feel free and be free🙏🙏🙏
Indeed
Its possibly one of the only ways to stop the future dangerous behavior of the occupier, who has now shown itself unable to govern and be responsible for those whom it occupies..!
insha Allah truth will prevail
100%
great coverage thank you very much
Yes!
it has been in violation of its original charter since *before it was put in place!*
it needs to be legally dissolved, or laws mean nothing.
In an honest world, or our American world!
Well, they are
Of course its an occupation
No such law when one country conquered another..
Thanks for the news. A piece of advice, it would be good to work on the script of your videos to avoid multiple repetitions.
Can we trust the ICJ ? What is their credibility??
Well the judge is already confirmed anti israel from his past
They Have To!!!!
👍🇵🇸❤🇵🇸👍
is there even a doubt?
Sure is. They were bias. Here are some facts for you :
- there was no mandatory palestine post in 1948. The arabs of mandatory palestine and the entire Arab league of the time rejected UNGAR 181 for the partition of the mandate for Palestine allowing it to become land without a sovereign.
- at the time of the 6 day war the westbank and part of jerusalem was illegally occupied by Jordan and Gaza illegally occupied by Egypt. In 1950 when Jordan attempted to annex the westbank the UN rejected it and it was never formally recognised.
- The PLO on it's 1964 Palestinian National Charter actually waived all claim to these areas. "Article 24 This organisation does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the west bank in the hashemite kingdom of Jordan, on the gaza strip or in the himmah (Golan) area. It's activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields."
- the last legitimate sovereign country to have the land before Israel was the Ottoman Empire which collapsed at the end of WW1
- The British wasn't a sovereign in palestine just a trustee, entrusted by the league of nations to prepare the residents of the mandate of Palestine to self govern.
Under international law an occupation is when a sovereign state overtakes the territory of another sovereign state. Palestine was never a state. The land in question was only ever the sovereign territory of Israel. It's previous illegal occupiers were the hashemite kingdom of jordan so it cannot be 'occupied' under international law'. 'Disputed' yes.
And there were efforts to share the land with the Oslo Accords but according to those accords they are void if no agreement is reached within 5 years and none was ever made.
So the westbank is today not occupied but disputed territory as it doesn't fit under the accepted definitions in international law.
Now what I saw the ICJ Opinion has done having now read it is to reference 15 November 1988 when the PLO proclaimed the establishment of the state of Palestine, which referred to resolution 181 (ii) which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state.
ICJ seem to have accepted that they can reject an offer in 1948, confirm their reiection again in 1964 and then come back 40 years later in 1988 and say to Israel I actually would like it now please, when they are still nit a sovereign state, when in the meantime they had initiated multiple wars against Israel with the declared intention of destroying Israel and Israel had fought a war where it was not the agressor in which it had acquired it.
And when listening to the ICJ Judge it sounded natural and accepted to refer to it as occupied palestinian territory with no explanation or hint that anyone would ever question that and when you read their opinion it goes through quite a bit of the history and at first glance there is no extra significance on 15 Nov 1988 PLO's proclaimed establishment of a palestinian state.
illegal
🇬🇧 🇵🇸
ICJ has become Antiseptic
Israel never occupied any land the whole holy land belongs to Israel 🇮🇱 👏
The Jewish money corrupts even the Courts.
The ladt election in gaza was in 2006, now who is illegal in Gaza? The hanas government or the Palestine civilians?
Sicuro
NEW MIDIAN
Opinions opinions..
Nethanyahu son shifted to usa
Nethanyahu shifting next month usa.
crocodile tears by pakistan
In the words of Salidin, the leaders of the Ottoman empire, the Arab Shieks that governed Jeruselem and it's surrounds. The Arab "Gypsies", south of Israel are the occupiers.
The mandate system was established by the League of Nations, which granted certain countries the authority to govern and develop these territories with the ultimate goal of preparing them for eventual independence. The countries that became mandates included Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Transjordan.
Two governing principles formed the core of the Mandate System, being non-annexation of the territory and its administration as a "sacred trust of civilisation" to develop the territory for the benefit of its native people.
Britain did not have the right to insert the "Balfour declaration" thereby giving Palestine to a third party hence breaking its "sacred trust of civilisation" for the benefit of it's native people.
Who cares?
Why post then?
Isreal said ICJ is illegal and Isreal is not members ICJ so ICJ can’t make a statement!
Member of ICJ; not a member of ICC.
Israel didn't have to say that as thus ruling is nit binding just advisory.
God said so…. lol.
Exist any legal occupation?
Good question. Have a nice morning/lunch/evening.
Actually it is disputed territory nor occupied. I spent time researching here yoi go if care to read:
- there was no mandatory palestine post in 1948. The arabs of mandatory palestine and the entire Arab league of the time rejected UNGAR 181 for the partition of the mandate for Palestine allowing it to become land without a sovereign.
- at the time of the 6 day war the westbank and part of jerusalem was illegally occupied by Jordan and Gaza illegally occupied by Egypt. In 1950 when Jordan attempted to annex the westbank the UN rejected it and it was never formally recognised.
- The PLO on it's 1964 Palestinian National Charter actually waived all claim to these areas. "Article 24 This organisation does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the west bank in the hashemite kingdom of Jordan, on the gaza strip or in the himmah (Golan) area. It's activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields."
- the last legitimate sovereign country to have the land before Israel was the Ottoman Empire which collapsed at the end of WW1
- The British wasn't a sovereign in palestine just a trustee, entrusted by the league of nations to prepare the residents of the mandate of Palestine to self govern.
Under international law an occupation is when a sovereign state overtakes the territory of another sovereign state. Palestine was never a state. The land in question was only ever the sovereign territory of Israel. It's previous illegal occupiers were the hashemite kingdom of jordan so it cannot be 'occupied' under international law'. 'Disputed' yes.
And there were efforts to share the land with the Oslo Accords but according to those accords they are void if no agreement is reached within 5 years and none was ever made.
So the westbank is today not occupied but disputed territory as it doesn't fit under the accepted definitions in international law.
Now what I saw the ICJ Opinion has done having now read it is to reference 15 November 1988 when the PLO proclaimed the establishment of the state of Palestine, which referred to resolution 181 (ii) which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state.
ICJ seem to have accepted that they can reject an offer in 1948, confirm their reiection again in 1964 and then come back 40 years later in 1988 and say to Israel I actually would like it now please, when they are still nit a sovereign state, when in the meantime they had initiated multiple wars against Israel with the declared intention of destroying Israel and Israel had fought a war where it was not the agressor in which it had acquired it.
And when listening to the ICJ Judge it sounded natural and accepted to refer to it as occupied palestinian territory with no explanation or hint that anyone would ever question that and when you read their opinion it goes through quite a bit of the history and at first glance there is no extra significance on 15 Nov 1988 PLO's proclaimed establishment of a palestinian state.