• This ruling by the ICJ represents a significant development in the ongoing occupation and genocide and carries significant legal and political implications
• Sir Alan Duncan, the former Conservative Member of Parliament, made his stance on the situation in occupied Palestine very clear, calling for Israel to “get out of Palestine, it’s not your country,”
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has recently rendered a significant ruling asserting that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories constitutes a violation of international law, a decision that underscores the longstanding and brutal suffering of the Palestinian people. This is due in part to the Apartheid enforced in the region and emphasises the violation committed by Israel in Article 3 of CERD (Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination).
The ICJ’s deliberations highlighted the principles of selfdetermination and sovereignty, emphasising that the ongoing occupation disregards the Palestinian right to self governance, which is enshrined in international law. Nawaf Salam, President of the International Court of Justice, stated that Israel must give compensation to Palestinians for the damage caused by its occupation, and that the UN Security Council, General Assembly, and other governments have an obligation not to acknowledge Israel’s occupation as legal.
As such, the ruling represents not merely a legal adjudication but also a moral call to the international community, urging nations to reassess their diplomatic and economic relations with Israel in light of these findings. This decision calls upon Israel to cease its unlawful activities and to dismantle the settlements it has built on occupied land. It also urges the international community to take effective measures to ensure compliance with the Fourth Geneva Convention and to provide assistance to the Palestinian people.
The implications of the ICJ ruling are far reaching, as it not only provides a framework for legal accountability but also reinforces the imperative for a resolution to the conflict that honours the dignity and rights of the Palestinian people. However, the ruling’s enforcement remains uncertain, given Israel’s history of non compliance with international mandates.
In a recent statement, Sir Alan Duncan, the former Conservative Member of Parliament, has condemned Israel’s occupation of Palestine, saying:
“Get out of Palestine, it’s not your country!”
His words left no room for ambiguity and made his stance very clear on the matter. This forthright remark underscores the growing international scrutiny and criticism directed towards Israel’s policies in the region. His remarks strongly condemned the Israeli occupation and settlement activities.
Sir Alan Duncan compared the situation to a form of apartheid and called for international action to address these issues.
These comments reflect a critical stance on Israel’s policies in the occupied territories, aligning with the broader international consensus that the settlements are illegal under international law.
This is not the first time Sir Duncan has been vocal about his views on the Israeli occupation of Palestine. In a notable speech at the Royal United Services Institute in 2014, he criticised Israeli settlements in the West Bank, describing them as a violation of international law and an obstacle to peace. Here’s an excerpt from his speech:
“Settlement endorsement, expansion, and encouragement must end. It is the settlements that are illegal. It is the settlements that breach international law. And it is the settlements that make peace impossible.”
As a seasoned politician with extensive experience in foreign affairs, Sir Alan’s words carry significant weight. His unequivocal stance reflects a broader shift in global sentiment, where the international community is increasingly calling for an imminent resolution to the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
While the ICJ’s advisory opinions are not legally binding, they carry significant weight and influence international law and opinion. This ruling by the ICJ represents a significant development in the ongoing occupation and genocide and carries significant legal and political implications.
The ICJ’s decision thus serves as a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse surrounding the conflict, reinforcing international legal standards while challenging the prevailing narratives that justify the occupation. This is a clear rebuke of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories and a reaffirmation of the international community’s commitment to upholding international law and the rights of the Palestinian people.
