Imane Rachidi
The Hague, May 2 (EFE) .- The International Court of Justice (CIJ) culminated this Friday a week of hearings in which he listened to dozens of countries Urgir to Israel to cooperate with UNRWA and protect his staff, an ode to “humanity” and “legality” that coincides with the fulfillment of two months from the absolute Israeli veto to the access of humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Representatives of more than 40 countries and international organizations paraded one by one from Monday before the judges of the United Nations Court, asserting what they understand that international law says of Israel’s obligations, as a UN member and as a “occupant power” of the Palestinian territories, towards the humanitarian groups.
The UN opened the week of audiences. His deputy general secretary of Legal Affairs, Elinor Hammarskjöld, reads Israel his legal “obligations”: he must “allow and facilitate” that UN entities help the local population, and “humanitarian, medical and UN staff must be protected: they cannot be attacked, arrest, intimidate, nor prevent their work.”
“If you have doubts about the impartiality of a humanitarian organization, you cannot simply say that it is not impartial and block your help. You must speak with the organization,” he said, referring to the Israeli veto to UNRWA under the accusation of alleged links with Hamas and participation in the attack of October 7, 2023.
In addition, the UN added, “continuous occupation for Israel is illegal”, international law “prohibits taking territories by force” and the Israeli government “has no right to sovereignty over any” Palestinian territory.
Israel did not participate in the hearings, but sent written statements in which he claimed to be “fully committed to complying with international law; but that is not a suicidal pact” and considered that cooperating with UNRWA is “accepting or facilitating a serious risk for its citizens and their territory”.
In his defense, the United States came out mainly, which stressed the “serious and credible concerns” about UNRWA and considered that Israel “retains a margin of appreciation regarding what help plans allow”, while “advances in their own military and security interests.”
The Palestinian ambassador, Ammar Hijaz, denounced that Israel has turned “Palestine, in particular Gaza, into a common grave for Palestinians and for those who come to their aid” and asked the judges to evaluate the Israeli veto to the aid “in the context of deletion and forced displacement.”
“The famine is here. Humanitarian aid is being used as a gun (…) This legal and moral crisis does not go back 18 months ago. Israel has been dispossessing, displacing, massacing and systematically imprisoning the Palestinians in a flagrant absolute contempt for international law,” said Hijazi.
South Africa regretted that the Israeli State “enjoys a kind of special treatment that protects it from accountability” for violating international standards, because “any person or entity who tries to make Israel give accounts for their inhuman and illegal acts suffer reprisals and sanctions.”
Russia, who frees his own war in Ukraine, considered that accepting the veto to UNRWA would be “a dangerous precedent” by allowing a country to “dismantle” an UN agency by considering it “uncomfortable”, and denounced that millions of Palestinians “face existential despair.”
For China, UNRWA is the “spine” of humanitarian aid in Palestine, and its “role in relieving the humanitarian crisis in the strip is indispensable and irreplaceable,” and, he added, Israel “cannot exercise sovereignty” in the Palestinian territories, “nor prohibit” UN activities.
Even two usual partners of Israel maintained hard positions towards the treatment given to the UNRWA. France considered that Israel is “forced to provide full assistance to the agency in the occupied Palestinian territory, which implies at least the obligation not to prevent its activities” on the field.
The United Kingdom defended that UNRWA is “an impartial humanitarian organization” and urged Israel to allow “complete, fast, safe and obstacle” access “of help, in addition to authorizing visits from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to” Palestinian detainees. “
The judges will issue their advisory opinion on Israel’s obligations towards humanitarian organizations in the coming months.
It will be the third time that the ICJ thinks about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Last year, he considered that Israeli settlements policies “violate international law” and Israel’s “continuous presence” in Palestine is “illegal”, so he demanded the “evacuation of all settlers”, and the return of land to its original residents displaced since 1967. In 2004, he confirmed the illegality of the separation wall. EFE
(Photo)
