Articles for category: AAA General

Legislating Reproductive Rights

In May, the Brazilian parliament introduced a bill that included a gestational age limit for performing abortions, even in cases where the pregnancy resulted from rape. In practice, the bill would criminalize women who were victims of sexual violence, especially young girls. The proposal triggered a strong reaction from civil society, which ultimately prompted parliament to withdraw the bill. The case illustrates how the Brazilian parliament has become a dangerous place for women’s sexual and reproductive rights – a situation that has worsened due to an institutional dispute between the parliament and the constitutional court.

13. Oktober 2024

, , , ,

Limiting ›Security‹ as a Justification in the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion

While international law accepts that States may employ otherwise prohibited actions in exceptional circumstances and within certain constraints, the Advisory Opinion firmly affirms that security cannot justify illegal actions such as annexation or prolonged occupation. The rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination, cannot be compromised by security claims. The Advisory Opinion serves to limit State practices predicated upon security when those practices violate essential rights and when the security claim is based upon an illegal situation created by the very State which invokes security concerns.

13. Oktober 2024

, ,

Security Considerations, the Duty to End Belligerent Occupations and the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israeli practices and policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

This contribution discusses three possible rationales for the Court’s rejection of the relevance of Israel’s security concerns: Lack of proof of serious and legitimate security concerns by Israel, the insufficiency of broad security concerns to justify the continued use of force, and the insufficiency of broad security concerns to deny realization of Palestinian self-determination. As long as international law doctrine on the duty to end a belligerent occupation despite the prevalence of serious security concerns remains contested, and as long as security conditions in the region remain extremely unstable, it is unlikely that a withdrawal will be deemed practicable

13. Oktober 2024

, , ,

The ICJ’s Treatment of Questions of Occupation in Gaza

The ICJ’s treatment of the state of occupation in Gaza is questionable. While it rightly accepted the functional approach to occupation, I doubt whether Israel was indeed capable of exercising its authority in Gaza sufficiently for its occupation to be found as having continued post-2005. The Court should have relied on Israel’s continued exercise of administrative authority vis-a-vis Gaza residents to find the existence of a state of occupation.

12. Oktober 2024

, ,

The Functional Approach as Lex Lata

The ICJ has de facto adopted the functional approach to occupation with regard to Gaza. The Opinion is thus a critical point in the development of the law of occupation, in that it transcends a binary approach to the question of the existence of occupation, in favour of a more nuanced approach that enables holding that a territory is occupied, but not in an “all or nothing” way. More generally, the Opinion as rejects a more restrictive approach to the question of whether occupation exists in a territory or not in favour of a more flexible approach.

12. Oktober 2024

, , ,

The Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Policies and Practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

This post analyses the separation between jus ad bellum / in bello as arising from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ. This separation was challenged by many States appearing before the Court, some of which implied that Israel’s policies and practices, as violations of jus in bello, rendered the occupation unlawful under jus ad bellum. The Court ultimately reaffirmed the separation with a twofold argument, namely qualifying the ‘legality of the occupation’ as a jus ad bellum question, and framing Israel’s policies and practices (prolonged occupation, annexation, and settlement policy) as violations of jus ad bellum.

11. Oktober 2024

, , ,

From Illegal Annexation to Illegal Occupation: The Missing Link in the Reasoning of the International Court of Justice

The Court’s determination that Israel’s annexation policies render its continued presence in the West Bank unlawful finds no basis in the international prohibition against the use of force. Moreover, the Court’s determination circumvents the Law of State Responsibility that determines the consequences of Israel’s unlawful annexation policies.

11. Oktober 2024

, , , , ,