Above photo: Reuters.
As part of its defense of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, the US ambassador asked if the court condemns Hamas.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) held its third day of hearings on 21 February on the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian West Bank territories.
The ICJ is now halfway through its hearing in which 52 nations and three organizations – the Arab League, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and African Union – are set to present arguments related to Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem.
Colombia’s representative, Andrea Jiménez Herrera, made her opening remarks by saying, “The occupation of the Palestinian territory is a violation of international law and is contrary to the principles enshrined in the Charter of the [UN].”
Herrara requested that the UN court “not underestimate the fact that the situation in Gaza has become more deadly over the past months and, therefore, the legal consequences of such actions must be even more serious today than in the world we were living before this bloodshed started.”
The Colombian representative added that the court should consider the “real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice” that the Palestinian people face as a result of the Israeli occupation of their land.
Cuban diplomat Anayansi Rodriguez Camejo said that “the Republic of Cuba believes that instead of talking about an apartheid regime, this regime should be pursued on charges of committing genocide in Palestine.”
“It was agreed by Resolution 242 that Israel’s armed forces would withdraw from the territories of 1967, but this was not so. The Palestinian people have the inalienable right to determine their own political, economic, and social destiny,” Rodriguez Camejo stressed.
She added that Palestinians’ right to self-determination has been undermined as a result of the Israeli settlements built in the occupied West Bank and that Israel and its allies should be held accountable for the “legal implications resulting from the sustained non-compliance” with international law.
“It is shocking that some states do not want the court to render its legal opinion. What message does this send on their respect for international justice and the rule of law?” Egypt’s legal counselor, Jasmine Moussa, asked.
Moussa added, “Egypt’s standpoint is that the situation in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem cannot be left amid Israeli violations.” She continued by saying that West Asia “yearns for peace and stability” and a “comprehensive and lasting resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”
Richard Visek, the legal adviser to the US Department of State, upon taking the stage, asked the court if it condemned the 7 October Palestinian resistance operation.
Visek added that the US is “engaging intensively with the Palestinians, with Israel and with other states in the region […] to advance a political settlement that will lead to a durable peace in the region that includes lasting security for Israelis and Palestinians and a path to Palestinian statehood.”
Russia’s ambassador to the Netherlands, Vladimir Tarabrin, said that Israel’s settlements in the West Bank are in contradiction to “the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,” adding that the UN had already determined these settlements as a “flagrant violation of international law and a major obstacle to the two-state solution and a just and lasting peace.”