Israel has an obligation not to allow its territory to be used for terrorist activities, argue UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) and European Leadership Network (ELNET) in their joint submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The ICJ has been asked by the UN’s General Assembly (UNGA) to provide an advisory opinion on Israel’s obligations in relation to the presence and activities of the UN, its agencies, and other international organisations and States in relation to “the Occupied Palestinian Territory”.

The UNGA’s referral of this question to the ICJ was prompted by legislation passed by overwhelming majorities in Israel’s parliament to terminate the “provisional” agreement made between Israel and UNRWA in 1967. The new legislation bans any contact between Israeli public authorities and UNRWA, and prohibits any representation, services or activity of UNRWA on Israel’s territory.

UKLFI and ELNET also submit that Israel has a right not to allow the UN and other international organisations to operate on its territory, and freedom of choice as to the method and means by which it complies with its humanitarian obligations.

The UNGA resolution asking the question refers to a possible “difference” between the UN and the State of Israel. UKLFI and ELNET’s submission observes that this difference is essentially as to the facts, in particular: whether and to what extent UNRWA has been infiltrated by terrorists, and whether essential humanitarian relief can be provided to Palestinians by organisations or means other than UNRWA.

UKLFI and ELNET go on to show that the ICJ cannot determine these factual issues and should not express any opinion that might be affected by them

• first, because the ICJ’s practices do not enable reliable determination of disputed facts in advisory opinion cases, particularly in cases relating to Israel where information provided by the UN Secretary General is unreliable;
• second, because a number of the ICJ’s judges are apparently biased against Israel;
• third, because the ICJ does not have sufficiently reliable information to provide a safe or judicial determination of the disputed facts; and
• fourth, because the ICJ can answer the question asked by the UNGA without making findings on disputed facts.

UKLFI and ELNET submit that the ICJ should simply answer that Israel has

• a right not to allow the UN and other international organisations to operate on its territory,
• an obligation not to allow its territory to be used for terrorist activities, and
• freedom of choice as to the method and means by which it complies with its humanitarian obligations.

UKLFI and ELNET highlight the problem discussed in their submission in the last advisory opinion case relating to Israel, that the UN’s extreme bias against Israel has resulted in material provided by the UN to the ICJ being highly unreliable and unbalanced.

Amongst other documents, they refer to the judgment of President Aharon Barak in Israel’s Supreme Court, which showed that the ICJ’s opinion on Israel’s security barrier was based on false and inadequate information provided by the UN.

The submission goes on to discuss extensive evidence of involvement by UNRWA and its staff in terrorism, including the atrocities of 7 October 2023. It also shows that UNRWA is not indispensable and has played only a minor role in humanitarian relief in Gaza in the course of the current conflict.

Advisory opinions are not legally binding, but many members of the public, organisations and States assume that they are correct.

However, the ICJ’s procedures in advisory opinion cases do not enable it to make a safe determination in relation to these disputed facts, as shown by the serious errors and imbalance of its assessment of the facts in its two previous advisory opinions relating to Israel.

The ICJ has scheduled oral hearings in this case over the whole of next week from Monday, 28 April to Friday, 2 May.

Jonathan Turner, UKLFI Chief Executive, said: “By this latest referral, many members of the UN General Assembly hope to obtain yet another advisory opinion of the ICJ based on false and biased information from the UN. It follows two other advisory opinions based on misleading information and the completely false allegations made against Israel by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Another opinion of the ICJ based on false and distorted factual findings will further undermine confidence in international courts, international law and the rule-based international order.”

Joan Ryan, Chief Executive of ELNET UK, said: “Israel, as the only democracy in the Middle East, should have the freedom of choice as to the method and means by which it complies with its humanitarian obligations.”

The full submission of UKLFI and ELNET can be viewed HERE