The United Nation’s top court filed a ruling Friday that echoed what Palestinian advocates have been saying for decades: Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, including its settlements in the West Bank, is illegal and must end.

The International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion also called for reparations for Palestinians who have lived under Israel’s occupation since it began in 1967, an unprecedented step for the court.

The court also notably declared Israel’s mistreatment of Palestinians to be a form of segregation and apartheid. It further ruled that nations cannot offer aid in support of the illegal occupation without violating international law, and upheld the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

  • subignition@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    This is good news. I hope that it will translate into some effective action.

    Edit: Misleading headline. This is an advisory opinion, which appears to be non-binding. I don’t think “ruling” is entirely appropriate.

    In general, advisory opinions are not binding, but may inform the development of international law. According to the ICJ website, advisory opinions:

    “carry great legal weight and moral authority. They are often an instrument of preventive diplomacy and have peace-keeping virtues. Advisory opinions also, in their way, contribute to the elucidation and development of international law and thereby to the strengthening of peaceful relations between States.”

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      Even if this were considered binding I’m hardpressed to think the US would play along with it.

      I think the best outcome would be if Europe were to lead with the first sanctions on Israel. The US will protest but will be forced to cover their ears when the EU reads off their thorough rationale. Maybe eventually, so long as the Democratic candidate succeeds for 2025, we will see concrete action.

      • NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        Which Democratic candidate are you thinking of? Surely not the one who has been bankrolling this whole thing so far…

        I don’t think any “viable” candidate from any party will support the ICJ judgement.

      • Waveform@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Even if this were considered binding I’m hardpressed to think the US would play along with it.

        Is not the US breaking its own law by continuing to provide Irarael monetary and military support? The Leahy Law says we can’t do that if the recipient of aid is commiting war crimes. All aid should be suspended while an impartial and independent party investigates Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank.

        • dick_stitches@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s the fun part! When the US government is also in charge on enforcing the law, they can do whatever they want!

  • Deceptichum@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Holy shit that’s some serious results.

    Oh well, not like the US cares about violating international law. Biden et al will keep arming, funding, and defending them.

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    That Israel is a shitty apartheid state anchored in a history of systemic ethnic cleansing. Dismantle it already and give everyone from the river to the sea the same rights. We’re all humans at the end of the day.

  • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think the real question here is, how is this court not corrupt? Does it just not have any real power so corrupt people aren’t attracted to it? Is there some process involved that keeps corrupt people out? We need to figure out how they have been able to stay uncorrupted and start farming that out to everywhere.

    • kiagam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      the advantage of having a supranational organization is that everybody is looking at it and its reputation relies on how good it is. the disadvantage is that they have no power other than advisory

        • kiagam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          fifa is weird, it is a private company kinda but not really. And they have all rights to the word football (?)

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            FIFA is absolutely private. They’re an association. Which is also the case for their members, which are national football associations, and that’s generally also the case for the members of those, which are the clubs. Long story short the reason FIFA sucks is because its members don’t properly reign it in. Part of the issue is that it’s not just handling the world cup, it’s also handling erm development aid, lots of money flowing to poorer regions so that they can buy cleats to develop more players which is all well and proper trouble is it invites corruption.

            OTOH they’re not actually as powerful as it seems, in the end the Brits are severely over-represented when it comes to laying down the laws of the game.

            The IOC is also an association, also under Swiss law, but a quite different beast: They’re basically a gentleman’s club travelling around the world making deals. It’s not like the world association of track and field or whatnot (which do exist for pretty much any sport) are members of it.