The Israeli Supreme Court and the government do consider settlement construction on privately owned Palestinian land to be illegal. Under the Oslo Accords, signed by Israel and the Palestinians in the 1990s, both sides agreed that the status of Israeli settlements would be resolved by negotiation.
Are Israel's settlements legal?
The majority of legal scholars hold the settlements to violate international law, while others have offered dissenting views supporting the Israeli position. The Israeli Supreme Court itself has never addressed the issue of the settlements' legality.
Why has the Israeli High Court failed to rule on settlements?
The Israeli High Court of Justice has failed to rule on the legality of settlements, as it considered the settlements to be a political issue that that it is not competent to hear.
Can military commanders legally build settlements in Israel?
During the 1970s, Israel's Supreme Court regularly ruled that the establishment of civilian settlements by military commanders was legal on the basis that they formed part of the territorial defense network and were considered temporary measures needed for military and security purposes.
How much of Israel’s land is allocated to settlements?
Within Area C, where most settlement construction is based, Israel has allocated 70% of the land to settlements and only 1% to Palestinians. In East Jerusalem, Israel has expropriated 35% of the city for the construction of settlements, while restricting Palestinians to construct on only 13% of the land.
Does Israel have illegal settlements?
Number of settlements and inhabitants As of 2022, there are 140 Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including 12 in East Jerusalem. In addition, there are over 100 Israeli illegal outposts in the West Bank.
Are Israeli settlements in area c illegal?
The international community considers the settlements in occupied territory to be illegal, and the United Nations has repeatedly upheld the view that Israel's construction of settlements constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Is Israel occupying Palestinian land illegally?
“For more than 40 years, the UN Security Council and General Assembly have stated in hundreds of resolutions that Israel's annexation of occupied territory is unlawful, its construction of hundreds of Jewish settlements are illegal, and its denial of Palestinian self-determination breaches international law,” he said.
Did Israel violate international law?
The international community has a responsibility to condemn crimes of apartheid and persecution. Israel's actions are a clear violation of international law, and the world must advocate for justice on behalf of the Palestinian people.
Has Israel signed the Geneva Convention?
Israel ratified the Geneva Conventions on July 6, 1951. Israel has not signed or ratified the 1907 Hague Regulations, but the Israeli High Court has found that the 1907 Hague Regulations are part of customary international law, and thus binding on all states, including those not party to the treaty.
Why is Israel occupying the West Bank?
Israel has cited several reasons for retaining the West Bank within its ambit: a claim based on the notion of historic rights to this as a homeland as affirmed in the Balfour Declaration of 1917; security grounds, both internal and external; and the deep symbolic value for Jews of the area occupied.
How many UN rules has Israel violated?
SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS: Laws Violated: Israel has violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (which are legally binding on member-nations U.N.
How many illegal settlements are there in Israel?
Israeli settlements are fortified, Jewish-only housing complexes built on Palestinian land in violation of international law. Between 600,000 and 750,000 Israeli settlers live in at least 250 illegal settlements in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem.
Does the settlement of Israel in Palestinian territory contravene international human rights law?
Israel's policy of settling its civilians in occupied Palestinian territory and displacing the local population contravenes fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.
Which UN members do not recognize Israel?
28 UN member states do not recognize Israel: 15 members of the Arab League (Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen); ten non-Arab members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Indonesia, ...
How much Palestinian land has Israel taken?
RAMALLAH, Palestine According to the bureau, Jews controlled only 6.2% of land in Palestine under British mandate (1920-1948). “Israel now controls around 27,000 cubic meters of land, accounting for 85% of historical Palestine,” the PCBS said.
Is Israel a stolen land?
Israel has declared at least 26 percent of the West Bank as “state land”. Using a different interpretation of Ottoman, British and Jordanian laws, Israel stole public and private Palestinian land for settlements under the pretext of “state land”.
How much of Palestine is occupied by Israel?
The 1948 war ended with Israeli forces controlling approximately 78 percent of historical Palestine. The remaining 22 percent fell under the administration of Egypt and Jordan. In 1967, Israel absorbed the whole of historical Palestine, as well as additional territory from Egypt and Syria.
What land is Israel occupying?
The Occupied Territories, which include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, are subject to the jurisdiction of Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), with the division of responsibilities overlapping in much of the territory.
Rights & Access
Publications of the Library of Congress are works of the United States Government as defined in the United States Code 17 U.S.C. §105 and therefore are not subject to copyright and are free to use and reuse. The Library of Congress has no objection to the international use and reuse of Library U.S. Government works on loc.gov.
Cite This Item
Citations are generated automatically from bibliographic data as a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate.
When did the Israeli Supreme Court rule on settlements?
In 1978 and 1979 the Israeli Supreme court, prompted by the new government policies, ruled on two important cases that set out the requirements for Israeli settlement legality under international law.
When did Israel legalize settlements?
During the 1970s, Israel's Supreme Court regularly ruled that the establishment of civilian settlements by military commanders was legal on the basis that they formed part of the territorial defense network and were considered temporary measures needed for military and security purposes.
What was the Israeli law in 1967?
Shortly after independence, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the fundamental principles of international law, accepted as binding by all civilized nations , were to be incorporated in the domestic legal system of Israel. In the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel occupied the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, West Bank, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights. Theodor Meron, at the time the Israeli government's authority on the topic of international law and legal counsel to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, was asked to provide a memorandum regarding the status in international law of proposed settlement of the territories, which he subsequently addressed to the Foreign Minister Abba Eban on 14 September 1967. He concluded that short-term military settlements would be permissible, but that "civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention," adding that the prohibition on any such population transfer was categorical, and that "civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention ." It follows from the presence on files of these notes, Gershom Gorenberg argues, that the Prime Minister at the time, Levi Eshkol, knew that Israeli settlements in the territories Israel had just occupied would violate international laws and that by that time Eshkol had been actively engaged in exploring the possibility of settling the newly conquered region. Meron's unequivocal legal opinion was marked top secret and not made public.
What did Ronald Reagan say about the settlements?
Notwithstanding the Hansell opinion, the official US position had been that the settlements are "an obstacle to peace". In February 1981, Ronald Reagan announced that he didn't believe that Israeli settlements in the West Bank were illegal. He added that "the UN resolution leaves the West Bank open to all people, Arab and Israeli alike". Hoping to achieve a peace deal, he nevertheless asked Israel to freeze construction calling the settlements an "obstacle to peace". The permissive attitude taken by America accelerated the pace of Israel's settlement programme. Reagan's view on the settlements legality was not held by the State Department. The George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush administrations did not publicly comment on the legality of Israeli settlements, but spoke publicly against them. Since the Clinton administration, the U.S. has continued to object to the settlements, calling them "obstacles to peace" and prejudicial to the outcome of final status talks. Although President Barack Obama and diplomatic officials in his administration have stated, "the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements," in February 2011 the U.S. vetoed a Security Council resolution that would have declared the settlements illegal. In December 2016, the U.S. abstained on a Security Council Resolution that declared that Israeli settlements are illegal and deemed their continuing construction a "flagrant violation" of international law. In abstaining, U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power stated, "Today the Security Council reaffirmed its established consensus that the settlements have no legal validity. The United States has been sending a message that settlements must stop privately and publicly for nearly five decades." This position was United States policy and had been stated by Secretary of State John Kerry and by the Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Obama administrations. In November 2019, the Trump administration expressly repudiated the Hansell opinion and stated that the United States considered the status of the settlements as being "not inconsistent with" international law. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also said: "The hard truth is that there will never be a judicial resolution to the conflict, and arguments about who is right and who is wrong as a matter of international law will not bring peace." However, Pompeo added that "the United States Government is expressing no view on the legal status of any individual settlement."
What article of the Geneva Convention is against the settlements?
Hansell concluded that the settlements are "inconsistent with international law", and against Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Hansell Memorandum found that " [w]hile Israel may undertake, in the occupied territories, actions necessary to meet its military needs and to provide for orderly government during the occupation, for the reasons indicated above the establishment of the civilian settlements in those territories is inconsistent with international law."
Why did Israel take control of the West Bank?
It has been argued that Israel took control of the West Bank as a result of a defensive war. Former Israeli diplomat Dore Gold writes that:
Which country has always affirmed the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention?
The International Committee of the Red Cross in a declaration of December 2001 stated that "the ICRC has always affirmed the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the territories occupied since 1967 by the state of Israel , including East Jerusalem".
When will Israel legalize Jewish homes?
June 9, 2020. JERUSALEM — Israel’s Supreme Court on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a 2017 law that would have allowed for the retroactive legalization of thousands of Jewish homes built on occupied West Bank land privately owned by Palestinians, a law so provocative that few believed when it was passed that it would survive judicial review.
How many Jewish homes were built in the West Bank?
Palestinian landowners will now be able to move ahead with lawsuits to recover privately owned property on which nearly 4,000 Jewish homes had been built in the occupied West Bank.
Who called on Netanyahu to annex the West Bank?
And Naftali Bennett, leader of the right-wing Yamina party, called upon Mr. Netanyahu both to annex West Bank territory and to pass a judicial-override bill. “I expect the prime minister to act,” Mr. Bennett said. “To apply sovereignty and legislate the override law. The rest is meaningless chatter.”.
Did Netanyahu evacuate Amona?
But Mr. Netanyahu was under enormous pressure from the right wing: His government had just carried out a court order to evacuate about 40 settler families at the Amona outpost, declared illegal a decade earlier. Israel’s new government, by contrast, is of two minds on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with Benny Gantz, ...
Did Netanyahu comment on the Supreme Court ruling?
On the right, Mr. Netanyahu did not comment on the court’s ruling, but others in his Likud party urged the enactment of a law allowing Parliament to override the Supreme Court. A sponsor of the overturned law, Bezalel Smotrich, a lawmaker now in the opposition, issued a warning.
How many houses have been destroyed in Israel?
Violations of the right to adequate housing: Since 1967, Israel has constructed tens of thousands of homes on Palestinian land to accommodate settlers while, at the same time, demolishing an estimated 50,000 Palestinian homes and other structures, such as farm buildings and water tanks. Israel also carries out demolitions as a form of collective punishment against the families of individuals accused of attacks on Israelis. In East Jerusalem, about 800 houses have been demolished since 2004 for lack of permits. Israel also confiscates houses inhabited by Palestinians in the city to allocate them to settlers. By forcibly evicting and/or demolishing their homes without providing adequate alternative accommodation, Israel has failed in its duty to respect the right to adequate housing of thousands of Palestinians.
What are the rights of Israel?
States have a duty to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of people under their jurisdiction, including people living in territory that is outside national borders but under the effective control of the state. The ICJ confirmed that Israel is obliged to extend the application of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other treaties to which it is a state party to people in the OPT. Israel is a state party to numerous international human rights treaties and, as the occupying power, it has well defined obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of Palestinians.
How did the expansion of settlements affect the Palestinians?
Violations of the right to earn a decent living through work: The expansion of settlements has reduced the amount of land available to Palestinians for herding and agriculture, increasing the dependency of rural communities on humanitarian assistance. Settler violence and the destruction of Palestinian-owned crops and olive trees have damaged the livelihoods of farmers. The UN has reported that in Hebron city centre, the Israeli military has forced 512 Palestinian businesses to close, while more than 1,000 others have shut down due to restricted access for customers and suppliers.
What are the violations of the rights of Palestinians?
Violations of the rights to equality and non-discrimination: Systematic discrimination against Palestinians is inherent in virtually all aspects of Israel’s administration of the OPT. Palestinians are also specifically targeted for a range of actions that constitute human rights violations. The Israeli government allows settlers to exploit land and natural resources that belong to Palestinians. Israel provides preferential treatment to Israeli businesses operating in the OPT while putting up barriers to, or simply blocking, Palestinian ones. Israeli citizens receive entitlements and Palestinians face restrictions on the grounds of nationality, ethnicity and religion, in contravention of international standards.
What are the violations of the right to access an effective remedy for acts violating fundamental rights?
Violations of the right to access an effective remedy for acts violating fundamental rights: Israel’s failure to adequately investigate and enforce the law for acts of violence against Palestinians, together with the multiple legal, financial and procedural barriers faced by Palestinians in accessing the court system, severely limit Palestinians’ ability to seek legal redress. The Israeli High Court of Justice has failed to rule on the legality of settlements, as it considered the settlements to be a political issue that that it is not competent to hear.
What weapons did Israel use to suppress protests?
Israeli forces have used tear gas, rubber bullets and occasionally live rounds to suppress peaceful protests. Violations of the rights to equality and non-discrimination: Systematic discrimination against Palestinians is inherent in virtually all aspects of Israel’s administration of the OPT.
What is the status of settlements under international law?
STATUS OF SETTLEMENTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW. Israel’s policy of settling its civilians in occupied Palestinian territory and displacing the local population contravenes fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.
Overview
The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal on one of two bases: that they are in violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, or that they are in breach of international declarations. The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have …
Background
Shortly after independence, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the fundamental principles of international law, accepted as binding by all civilized nations, were to be incorporated in the domestic legal system of Israel. In the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel occupied the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, West Bank, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights. Theodor Meron, at the time the Israeli government's authority on the topic of international law and legal counsel to the Israel…
Status of the territories
Although all areas in question were captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel has treated them in three different ways:
• "East Jerusalem"—Jerusalem and its surroundings were envisioned as an international area under United Nations administration in the 1947 partition plan, which was accepted by the Jewish Agency but rejected by all Arab nations. In 1948, Jordan captured and annexed the eastern half o…
International legal opinions
At present, based on the result of numerous UN resolutions that cite Article 49 of the Geneva Convention, the consensus view of the international community is that Israeli settlements are illegal and constitute a violation of international law. According to the BBC, as of 2008 every government in the world, except Israel, considered the settlements to be illegal. In November 2019, the United States said that it no longer views them as inconsistent with international law.
Legal arguments
Almost all international lawyers and every state but Israel regard the Geneva Conventions as part of customary international law, implying all states are duty bound to observe them. Israel alone challenges this premise, arguing that the West Bank and Gaza are "disputed territories", and that the Conventions do not apply because these lands did not form part of another state's sovereign territory, and that the transfer of Jews into areas like the West Bank is not a government act but …
Unauthorized or illegal outposts
In two cases decided shortly after independence (the Shimshon and Stampfer cases) the Israeli Supreme Court held that the fundamental rules of international law accepted as binding by all "civilized" nations were incorporated in the domestic legal system of Israel. The Nuremberg Military Tribunal had already determined that the articles annexed to the Hague IV Convention of 1907 were customary law, recognized by all civilized nations.
See also
• Israeli law in the West Bank settlements
• House demolition in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict
• International law and the Arab–Israeli conflict
• West Bank Areas in the Oslo II Accord
Notes
1. ^ Playfair 1992, p. 396.
2. ^ Albin 2001, p. 150.
3. ^ Quigley 1999, p. 72.
4. ^ ReliefWeb 2016.
5. ^ Beaumont 2016.