Israel's Security Fence from a Legal Perspective

The Security Fence

Hearing at the Hague
Ten Key Questions
By Robert Klein

Editor: Gila Ansell Brauner

UN Secretary General's Summary to UN General Assembly, 24th November 2003

Source: http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/
0e0abe0d890c7e8a85256dec006600c7?OpenDocument

Note: The document below is a summary of the Secretary General and not a document presented by the Government of Israel.

Annex I
Summary legal position of the Government of Israel

1. Much of the information in this annex is derived from materials provided to the United Nations by the Government of Israel. Other information comes from publicly available sources.

2. Israel's Parliament has not incorporated the Hague Regulations into domestic legislation; however, Israeli authorities have relied on article 23 (g) of those Regulations, which permits the seizure of property if demanded by the necessities of war.

3. Despite having ratified the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel has not incorporated it into its domestic legislation. Nor does it agree that the Convention is applicable to the occupied Palestinian territory, citing the lack of recognition of the territory as sovereign prior to its annexation by Jordan and Egypt and, therefore, not a territory of a High Contracting Party as required by the Convention.

4. Israel denies that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, both of which it has signed, are applicable to the occupied Palestinian territory. It asserts that humanitarian law is the protection granted in a conflict situation such as the one in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, whereas human rights treaties were intended for the protection of citizens from their own Government in times of peace.

5. Regarding the route, the Government of Israel states that neither the "Green Line" nor the armistice line were confirmed as international boundaries in Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), which call upon the parties to negotiate. The legal status of the occupied Palestinian territory remains disputed.

6. According to its statement made before the General Assembly on 20 October 2003, the Government of Israel believes the construction of the Barrier is consistent with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, its inherent right to self-defence and Security Council resolutions 1368 (2001) and 1373 (2001). Israeli officials say the Barrier has contributed to a significant decline in the number of attacks inside Israel. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, between 1 April 2002 and 31 December 2002, 17 suicide bombers crossed into Israel from the central West Bank and killed 89 Israelis. Between 1 January 2003 and 5 November 2003, after part of the Barrier had been completed, eight suicide bombers entered Israel from the central West Bank and killed 51 Israelis.

7. The Government of Israel has asserted that land requisitions issued to enable the building of the Barrier are proportionate given the number of deaths and injuries sustained by Israeli citizens and are carried out in accordance with both international and local law.

8. The Government of Israel argues: there is no change in ownership of the land; compensation is available for use of the land, crop yield or damage to the land; residents can petition the Supreme Court to halt or alter construction and there is no change in resident status. It says that the completion of the Barrier will in fact, allow the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to reduce its presence in the West Bank and remove roadblocks and checkpoints, thereby improving overall humanitarian conditions in the West Bank.

9. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs emphasized that the permit process for the Closed Area is still in its early stages and that Israel is "committed that residents and those that use the area will be able to live in and use the area with minimal interference".

10. As for access to the Closed Area by non-residents, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has advised that permits, as opposed to ID Cards, will be issued based upon need. They explain that the activity of the individual will affect the nature of the permit; for example, a teacher would receive a permit for an entire school year and an olive farmer based on seasonal needs, and the health-care worker might have a permit for all occasions. While legal proof of ownership or residence would be best, it will not be necessary to receive official documentation proving ownership. Those wishing to visit friends and family would be permitted access subject to the security situation.

* Palestinians often call this system the Separation Wall and Israelis use the term Security Fence. For the purposes of the present report, the more general term "the Barrier" is used.

 

 

 

 


Terms and Conditions of Use of the Website
Copyright © 1992 - 2008 The Department for Jewish Zionist Education. All rights reserved.
The e-mail addresses @jajz are being discontinued
To Contact Us, Click and Choose Educational Helpdesk under Category