Figure 1. The Court's ruling further reinforces the demand to ensure justice and accountability for the Palestinian and Israeli victims. Source: Unsplash.
More than a year since the Office of the Prosecutor concluded its preliminary examination into the Situation in the State of Palestine, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued the embrace of the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, under the Court's complete territorial jurisdiction. This landmark decision further reinforced the demand that the Prosecutor take immediate action, thus ensuring justice and accountability for the Palestinian and Israeli victims.
Figure 2. In May 1948, the war in Palestine ended and Israel declared itself an independent state, with Israeli forces controlling approximately 78 percent of historical Palestine. Source: Unsplash.
The relatively small area of land located between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River which geographically constituted what was referred to as Palestine until the early 20th century, has played a prominent role in shaping the history of the Middle East region. The convenient bearings of this area, settled between Africa and Asia, as well as the sacred value of the land and its association with several major world religions, promoted Palestine’s status as one of significant political worth.
Today, 'Palestine' only includes the West Bank, the territory settled between Israel and Jordan and the Gaza Strip, bordering Israel and Egypt. However, this is only in theory, as following decades of war, Israeli authorities currently occupy the remaining Palestinian territories, resulting in unlawful and discriminatory restrictions and countless deaths of innocent civilians. More than 135 countries in the United Nations have recognised Palestine as an independent state, while countries such as Israel and the United States have adopted a more conflicting evaluation. Additionally, 30 countries refuse to acknowledge Israel. This imbalance of inferences has assisted in further complicating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The State of Palestine officially joined the Court in 2015 as a legitimate State Party to the Rome Statute. This arrangement secured that the entirety of the oPt is within the scope of territorial jurisdiction for investigations conducted by the Prosecutor concerning international crimes, including all war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israel and its political allies. On 20 December 2019, the ICC Prosecutor announced the conclusion of the preliminary examination.
Figure 3. In 1967, Israel defeated the Arab armies and captured the Palestinian territories previously occupied by Egypt and Jordan. Source: Unsplash.
The recent ruling had been anticipated since 20 December 2019, and garnered support from Al-Haq, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and Al Dameer Association for Supporting Prisoners and Human Rights (the Coalition). Now, the Court's territorial jurisdiction extends to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, namely Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.
Pre-Trial Chamber I examined the Prosecutor's request, as well as, the states, organisations, scholars, and victims who participated as amicus curiae [1]. The Chamber determined that regardless of Palestine's status under general international law, its association with the Statute followed the correct procedure and corresponded with the Assembly of States Parties'accession procedure. Hence, Palestine has agreed to subject itself to the ICC Rome Statute's terms and possesses the right to be administered the same treatment as any other State Party.
The Court also asserted that the General Assembly of the United Nations in Resolution 67/19 further reaffirmed the right to independence and self-determination by the Palestinian people and the territories occupied since 1967. The ensuing conclusion to embrace the occupied Palestinian territories under the Court’s complete territorial jurisdiction, passed by the majority of the judicial body, composed of Judge Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou and Judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut, was formed on that basis.
Numerous past allegations, such as the "grave crimes" committed by Israel during the 2014 war against Gaza, the wounding and killing of thousands of unarmed demonstrators during the Great March of Return during the 2018-2019 period of conflict, Israel's settlement activities in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, as well as the criminal activities involving Palestinian armed groups can now be thoroughly investigated.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, Michael Lynk (Canada), stated that the adoption of the Rome Statute and accompanying creation of the International Criminal Court symbolized an international pledge to terminate impunity for the committing of grave crimes. He added that if international legal obligations had been enforced years prior, the conflict could have been resolved without the ICC process.
Figure 4. International courts had previously declared Israeli's actions illegal, however, Palestinian victims received no response. Source: Unsplash.
Despite the fact that the ICC ruling offers a chance of peace in the Middle East, many Israelis find the ruling to be unjust, claiming defence as being the party not responsible for Palestinian violence. The Israeli military (IDF) also expressed its disapproval towards the ICC ruling and reassured its pledge to defend the security of Israel and its citizens within national and international legal bounds, as well as while adhering to the values of the IDF and its Code of Ethics. In addition, the Israeli government announced its intention to coordinate steps with Washington over the Court's ruling. The escalating political pressure implies that the road to justice will be far from brief or straightforward, especially considering that this was not the first time an international court has declared Israeli acts illegal, with no concrete actions in response.
For some, the Court's decision represents a confident stride towards justice, freedom, and the restoration of the human rights and moral values of the victims of the nearly century-long conflict. However, it can be assumed that the majority of Palestine's supporters remain deviated from the course of hope, as this is not the first instance of an international court declaring Israeli acts as illegal, however, resulting in no positive response. Although most Palestinian victims serve as undocumented and trapped inhabitants of an occupied land whose circumstances can only be defined as unfair and even inhumane, it is essential to recognise the Court's decision as reasonable and proportionate, as it is every State's obligation to adhere to the ICC Rome Statute's terms equally and consequently, receive equal treatment by the Court.
[1] An amicus curiae ("friend of the court”) is someone who is not a party to a case who assists a court by offering information, expertise, or insight that has a bearing on the issues in the case.
Comments