The Foreign Office has said it is “carefully considering” the UK response to the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.
In an advisory ruling published last Friday, the ICJ stated that Israeli settlements in the territory contravene the principles of international law and must end.
The court’s panel of 15 judges from around the world also said Israel should immediately cease settlement expansion and evacuate all settlers from the occupied areas.
British-French international law expert Philippe Sands KC, acted as counsel for Palestine in the proceedings.
It also suggested Gaza has effectively been occupied by Israel despite its 2005 withdrawal as result of Israel’s ability to control its borders and restrict the passage of goods and people.
In a statement the FCDO confirmed:”We have received the Advisory Opinion issued by the International Court of Justice on Friday 19 July and are considering it carefully before responding. The UK respects the independence of the ICJ.
“The Foreign Secretary was clear on his visit to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories earlier this week that the UK is strongly opposed to the expansion of illegal settlements and rising settler violence.
“This government is committed to a negotiated two-State solution which can deliver a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.”
Prime Minsister Keir Starmer and foreign secretary David Lammy are expected to be pressed to respond further to the ICJ ruling this week.
The South African delegation at the ICJ last month
The ICJ’s decision remains non-binding, but reports in Israel suggested it was a clear attempt at forcing the UN General Assembly, the Security Council, and the United States into taking more decisive action over Israeli occupation matters.
In an advisory opinion that provoked anger in Israel, and which was also condemned by the Board of Deputies in the UK, the ICJ declared Israel’s long-term occupation of Palestinian territory “unlawful” and said it amounted to de facto annexation.
The court called for Israel to rapidly quit the occupied territories and ruled Palestinians were due reparations for the harm of 57 years of an occupation that systematically discriminates against them.
In response to the decision, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the Jewish people cannot be considered occupiers in their historic homeland.
“The Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land, including in our eternal capital Jerusalem nor in Judea and Samaria, our historical homeland,” Netanyahu said.” No absurd opinion in the Hague can deny this historical truth or the legal right of Israelis to live in their own communities in our ancestoral [sic] home.”
In a statement, shared on X by the Board, the World Jewish Congress said:”Today’s ICJ opinion unjustly singles out Israel while ignoring the relentless attacks committed against the world’s only Jewish state.
“The initial request for the court to review the matter was biased and flawed, disregarding the complex realities of the conflict and the extensive terror infrastructure that Hamas and other actors have developed through years of deception.
“True peace necessitates direct negotiations and requires the decisive rejection of Hamas by Palestinian society.
“We stand firmly with Israel and reiterate our unwavering commitment to a negotiated two-state solution that ensures security and dignity for Israelis and Palestinians.”
“We have been clear that Israel’s program of government support for settlements is both inconsistent with international law and obstructs the cause of peace,” a U.S. State Department spokesperson said on Saturday, responding to the ruling.
“However, we are concerned that the breadth of the court’s opinion will complicate efforts to resolve the conflict,” the State Department added.
Phillipe Sands KC, speaking at World Jewish Relief dinner
But the pro-peace advocacy group Yachad were among the organisations to say the ICJ’s ruling “should not come as a surpise.”
In a statement they added:”The Palestinian territories have now been occupied by Israel for 57 years.
“The Israeli gvoernment has never been clearer that it has no intention on entering a political resolution to end the conflictand has shown it is willing to annex territories by it’s ever growing settlement building.”
Yachad added it was “essential those who care about Israel do not rush to excuse or defend the occupation in response to the ICJ ruling.”
They also slammed those questioning the “validity” of the ICJ, adding “independent of the judiciary remains a basic tenet of democratic norms.”
But Israel’s Justice Minister Yariv Levin said that “No lies [by the World Court] will change the simple fact: the Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel.”
Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz said the court’s legal opinion, saying it
“Ignores the past and the historical rights of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. ”
While National Security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir labellled the ICJ opinion “antisemitic” and calling for an immediate annexation of the West Bank.
Opposition Leader Yair Lapid also said that the ruling is “disconnected, one-sided, tainted by antisemitism,” and “serves only Islamic terrorism.”
But in their statement the Peace Now orgainsation said:“It’s time to realise that we must end the occupation.”
Outlining the court’s opinion last Friday, ICJ president Nawaf Salam, said: “The court considers that the violations by Israel of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force and of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination have a direct impact on the legality of the continued presence of Israel, as an occupying power, in the occupied Palestinian territory.
“The sustained abuse by Israel of its position as an occupying power, through annexation and an assertion of permanent control over the occupied Palestinian territory and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and renders Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful.”
David Lammy meets Benjamin Netanyahu
Philippe Sands KC said: “This is as clear and far-reaching ruling as I have come across from this court.
“Its legal consequences are entirely without ambiguity, its political consequences far-reaching.
“Among the many practical consequences, the court has made clear its view, by an overwhelming majority, that the US and other embassies in Jerusalem are illegal and must be removed for international law to be respected.”
Sands is highly regarded both as a barrister, at Matrix Chambers, and as an author, and is a regular speaker at Jewish functions.
Israel did not participate in the proceedings, which featured arguments from 52 states, instead submitting a written argument urging the ICJ to dismiss the request for an opinion.
Israel captured the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in the 1967 six-day war.
It has annexed East Jerusalem in a move that is not recognised internationally and considers the West Bank, to which it has moved people in settlements, to be disputed territory.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas welcomed the court’s decision, calling it a “victory for justice.”
