Previously, the Court made clear in 2004, in the advisory opinion on the separation wall, two things: the first is that the Geneva Conventions, especially the fourth, apply to the occupied Palestinian territories, which relate to the protection of civilians, and the second is that Article 51 of the United Nations Charter relating to legitimate self-defense does not It applies in the case of the occupied territories, since Israel is an occupying state, and the occupying state cannot claim to be defending itself against those it occupies. We hope that the advisory opinion will clarify all the laws that relate to the current legal situation, and it is sufficient for this opinion to emerge with a certainty of condemnation. The settlements that are now spreading and tearing apart the occupied territories of Palestine, as well as against racial discrimination against the Palestinian people, and the long period of occupation, which makes it clear that Israel has no intention of leaving these lands, and the transformation of the military occupation project into a settler colonial project that wants to completely refute the rights of the Palestinian people, including the right Self-determination. What is the most prominent evidence that was presented to the Court of Justice against Israel in the advisory opinion lawsuit? From a legal standpoint, we explained what is happening on the ground in contrast to what exists and is established in international law, especially the jus cogens rules that all states must pay attention to, the first of which is not to seize lands of others by force, which is the opposite of what happened in the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967, and Israel’s lack of respect for United Nations resolutions, including Security Council Resolutions No. 442 and 338. We also explained that Palestine as a state began decades ago to negotiate with Israel to reach a final and comprehensive solution to the problem. However, Israel has disavowed all the legal obligations it agrees to in these agreements, and we have proven that. We have also relied on the reports issued by the rapporteurs for the Palestinian territories in the Human Rights Council and the United Nations General Assembly, and all of these reports showed what is happening on the ground in Racial discrimination and segregation of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories or inside Israel and the seizure of their lands, especially in the city of East Jerusalem, especially since the seizure of Jerusalem in its entirety is illegal and inconsistent with United Nations resolutions.

East Jerusalem is scheduled to be the capital of the State of Palestine, but it has been seized and demographic change is taking place there. We also revealed with evidence the withdrawal of building and house permits against Palestinian citizens in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and we touched on Israel’s practices that actually deny the right to self-determination, and we asked the court to consider In all these violations of international law to conclude the necessity of ending the Israeli occupation of the occupied Palestinian territories without conditions and directly. In general, it can be said that we presented all the defenses presented by the Palestine delegation before the International Court of Justice, as the supreme judicial body in the United Nations, and we relied on the rules of law and the Charter of the United Nations. And basically, the reports and decisions issued, we made clear that what is happening in the occupied territories is completely inconsistent with the rules of international law, and we included the issue of Gaza, but within this legal framework, all the practices that occur in the Gaza Strip confirm that this occupation has become illegal.