Articles for category: Focus

The Findings of the ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Oslo Accords and the Amici Curiae Proceedings before the ICC in the Situation of Palestine

This article focuses on the legal findings of the ICJ concerning the Oslo II Accord, and argues in favour of its relevance in deciding the jurisdictional question raised by the UK before the International Criminal Court (ICC). It also addresses whether invoking this question through a procedure of an amicus curiae during the warrant of arrest stage fits neatly within the ICC’s procedural regime, and it concludes that it does not.

Unmasking the Intractable

The first contribution of the online symposium explores the ineffectiveness of anti-racism laws. It raises the leading question whether their underperformance is a result of unrealistic expectations regarding the potential of law in general, or whether inherent flaws in legal design are the root cause.

Unseating the Israeli Government from the UN General Assembly in case of non-compliance with the Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024

This post analyses the possibility of unseating the Israeli Government from the UN General Assembly in case of non-compliance with the Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024. The Advisory Opinion provides a particularly strong legal basis – grounded primarily in the right to self-determination – to unseat Israel’s government from the General Assembly until it complies with the Opinion – as the Assembly did with South Africa fifty years ago.

Third State obligations in the ICJ Advisory Opinion

What are the possible implications of the Advisory Opinion for the United Kingdom and Cyprus with regard to the UK’s arms and surveillance support to Israel through its military bases in Cyprus? This post argues that the third State obligations identified by the Court, including the duty not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the illegal situation, also apply to the current war in Gaza.

The Obligation of Non-recognition, Occupation and the OPT Advisory Opinion

In the OPT Advisory Opinion, the ICJ considered that Israel’s abuse of its position as an Occupying Power, through de jure and de facto annexation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, renders Israel’s presence in the OPT unlawful. In determining the legal consequences of this illegal presence, the Court held by a vote of 12:3, that all States are under an obligation “not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. This holding was not accompanied by any concretization in either the Advisory Opinion or any of the many declarations and separate opinions attached to it.

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.

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.

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

Halbgare Würste

Bekanntlich sind Gesetze wie Würste. Doch dass man – anders als nach dem Otto von Bismarck zugeschriebenen Zitat – bei beiden durchaus dabei sein sollte, wenn sie gemacht werden, zeigt die momentane Reform des Tierschutzgesetzes. Am 26. September fand im Bundestag die erste Lesung statt. Der Gesetzesentwurf wurde in den vergangenen eineinhalbjährigen Vorarbeiten an entscheidenden Stellen abgeschwächt oder nicht zu Ende gedacht und begegnet deshalb rechtlichen Bedenken. Bevor es zu spät ist, sollten sich die anstehenden Ausschussberatungen jetzt um zukunftsfähige Regelungen bemühen, statt halbgare Kompromisse zu verwursten.