The United Nations’s top court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), ruled on Friday in The Hague that Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank is in violation of international law and that the parts that encroach on Palestinian territory should be dismantled.
”In view of the court’s finding that Israel’s violations of its international obligations stem from the construction of the wall and from its associated regime, cessation of those violations entails in practice the dismantling forthwith of those parts of that structure situated within the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around east Jerusalem,” the head of the 15-judge panel, China’s Shi Jiuyong, read from the non-binding ruling.
The ICJ started giving its official ruling at 3pm, but leaked copies of the document were already circulating on the internet, quoting the court as saying the wall is ”contrary to international law”.
Palestinians hail judgement
The Palestinians hailed the judgement as an historic decision, saying it should be followed by the imposition of international sanctions.
”This is an historic day and an historic decision that has been delivered by the world’s highest legal authority,” Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qorei told a press conference in his West Bank offices as the judges were reading their non-binding judgement.
”The court has said to the world, to Israel and to the United States that the wall is illegal as it is built on other people’s land, on occupied territory.”
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s top aide, Nabil Abu Rudeina, said that international sanctions should be imposed on Israel in the light of the court’s verdict.
”The decision of the court is a victory for the rights of Palestinians and for international legitimacy,” Abu Rudeina said.
”It is a victory for international law and a real blow for Israel,” he added. ”This decision will lead to the isolation of Israel, and the international community should impose sanctions against Israel, for it is violating the law and international relations.”
Palestinian Negotiations Minister Saeb Erakat also expressed his delight at the outcome of the case, calling it a ”victory for justice”.
”The international community, notably the US, should be on the side of international legitimacy and stop dealing with Israel as a state above the law,” he said.
”Those who are pleading for a stable Middle East and to live in peace must realise that this cannot happen while Israel is treated as a state outside the law.”
Asked how the Ramallah-based government plans to react to the ruling, Erakat said the Palestinians ”had many options at our disposal” including pursuing their fight against the barrier at the UN Security Council and General Assembly.
Israeli Arab deputy Ahmed Tibi said the ruling ”proves that Israel is a state which violates the law the most and that the wall is creating a situation of apartheid which the international community cannot tolerate”.
Israel to ignore judgement
Israeli officials said the judgement has failed to make any mention of ”Palestinian terrorism”, which they argue is the driving force behind its construction.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s government has already vowed to ignore the advisory opinion of the court and complete building work by the end of next year.
Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom has been in Washington this week in a bid to secure help to prevent a negative outcome snowballing into a censure motion at the UN Security Council.
The ICJ, also known as the World Court, was asked by the UN Security Council to assess ”the legal consequences” of the barrier, which Israel calls an anti-terrorist fence but the Palestinians denounce as an ”apartheid wall”.
Originally planned to extend almost 700km, the barrier is actually a network of electric fencing, barbed wire and concrete walls that juts deep into the West Bank to snake around a number of Jewish settlements on Palestinian territory.
The Jewish state says the barrier is vital to prevent attacks on its soil but Palestinians claim its real purpose is a land grab pre-empting a definitive demarcation of the border of their promised state.
Although the court’s decision is non-binding and will almost certainly change nothing on the ground it could have important consequences in terms of public relations and thus also have a political impact. — Sapa-AFP