Posted on 06/26/2004 4:30:12 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
THE HAGUE : The International Court of Justice said it would give an advisory ruling on the legality of Israel's West Bank barrier on July 9, after hearings in the case were boycotted by the Jewish state.
The ICJ, the United Nations highest legal body, heard three days of testimony in February from 15 parties arguing against the controversial barrier.
The UN General Assembly called on the ICJ in December to give an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of the barrier.
Israel insists its construction is necessary to prevent infiltrations by West Bank militants, but it cuts deep inside the territory, de facto annexing some of the region's most fertile land and complicating the creation of a viable Palestinian state.
Regardless of the outcome of the ICJ case, Israel has insisted it will complete the barrier, which is eventually expected to stretch some 700 kilometers (430 miles), by the end of next year.
At the July hearing the ICJ judges will rule whether or not the court is competent to rule in the matter and if so, whether the barrier is legal under international law.
The ruling, known as an advisory opinion, will be non-binding but could have important consequences for public opinion about Israel and clarify international law.
Israel boycotted February's proceedings, saying they were one-sided because they did not take into account Palestinian suicide attacks on Israel. But it did enter written submissions to the court.
At the hearings the Palestinians asked the ICJ to declare that the barrier -- a mix of concrete, razor wire and electric fencing-- is illegal.
The head of the Palestinian delegation, Nasser al-Qidwa, told the juges that the construction of Israel's so-called security fence made the roadmap peace plan that aims to create an independent Palestinian state "practically impossible".
The United States, the European Union and Russia -- co-sponsors of the roadmap with the United Nations -- also did not attend hearings saying the ICJ was the inappropriate venue for the case.
However, both the United States and the EU have vehemently objected to the barrier, and in mid-June a US State Department spokesman reiterated the US position that it is a problem.
"It's a problem to the extent that it prejudices final borders, that it confiscates Palestinian property, or that it imposes further hardship on the Palestinian people," Richard Boucher said
Although 44 states and several international organisations entered written submissions to the court, in the end only the Palestinians, Jordan and a handful of African, Asian and Central American states spoke at the hearings.
Since Israel started erecting its barrier, which Palestinians have dubbed the "Apartheid Wall", in June 2002 some 230 kilometers (140 miles) have been completed, mostly in the northern West Bank.
This ruling is totally irrelevant.
Israel's right to defend itself from terrorists is absolute. If the Hauge "justices" have a problem with that, they ought hold court on an Israeli bus.
"The ruling, known as an advisory opinion, will be non-binding but could have important consequences for public opinion about Israel and clarify international law."
"Clarify" international law? Or make a new one up out of whole cloth? Yeah, I suspect the latter. Call me crazy.
Qwinn
"At the July hearing the ICJ judges will rule whether or not the court is competent to rule in the matter"
LOL. Thats almost as funny as "UN investigates self in Oil for Food scandal"
Relocate the UN HQ from NYC to the gaza strip please :)
These rats in the "World Court" are unhappy that Israel has greatly cut off the suicide bombers. This phony court can be trouble in that it may set the groundwork for European trade boycotts.
These guys have any fun?
The only roadblock on the "roadmap to peace" is Arafat.
That's how they end the article. But how about: "Since Israel started erecting its barrier, which Palestinians have dubbed the 'Apartheid Wall', suicide attacks have declined 75% and are non-existent near completed portions." That would have been fair and balanced, letting each side have its say.
Also misleading: The article failed to note that Israel gave in to US demands to move the fence to the west. As a result, it comes fairly close to the 1949 armitice lines.
Fixed fortifications have a mixed military record, but so far this one is working.
If we put a meaningful fence up on our borders, I guess the World Court would soon declare it illegal as it would constitute a hardship for the Mexican people.
But, what about the wall in China? It's been there for years, 4 thousand miles long and nobody says nothing?
They make it a UN World Heritage site!
We need our own wall, there must not be a wall gap!
Ah, yes, the world court - still seeking relevance.
Remember, folks, Clinton signed on to subject Americans to the jurisdiction of this kangaroo court. Bush erased Clinton's name from the agreement and told'em "No, thanks."
Who are you voting for in November?
Agreed that fixed fortifications do have a mixed record against well trained armies that are well led but the Isreali's are fighting arabs . Arab armies are neither well trained nor are they well led.
How much do we pay these guys to argue about someone elses fence? International Court of fools and busybodies. With all the beheadings, and car bombs they think a fence is most important?!
International Nanny Court. Next ruling, should baseball caps be worn with the bill to the front or the side...
To call it a Court of Justice is a misnomer. I fully expect the World Court to declare Israel's act of self-defense illegal.
Ah, but the difference is that you knew it was make believe.
These poor souls have no idea that they have no clothes. Or that the rest of us are pointing and laughing.
Ha Ha ... well I won't tell them if you won't. ;)
However, should they get any closer than the Hague, I'm afraid I will have to get serious, and in the now infamous words of VP Cheney, tell them to F - Off!
in a related story; the court will rule on environmental impact of canals on mars.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.