of the initial opinions, the existence of that, as i was about as seen and deeper, decided the technician, independent, perceiving the quotes, the government, the scope of the site, and then examines the effects. if any of that is it has policies and practices that one, it's exist sites. a lot of it's alex is the quote is of, if you had people along connected of it, i have unloaded policies and practices. a good a vase that a violation of that i thought would be, but it sydney and b. but to said that the munition, as a consequence of as an explosive practices which spent decades the but a sending people has been deprived of is that i just said that the nation over a long period. and so the prolonged vision of these policies and practices undermine the size of this side and the future for these, these are the court is of the view. that is, it is unlawful places and practices in, but each of is,

it has obligation to respect that. i've always depended city, and people have decided instead of an issue they might have in which these places affect that he could stay because of the occupation and bed by the guy that the over the court. then you presence up, is it a and occupied? 33 is discussed with so we don't need to, but i see i shall now continue reading the rest of the opinion in french. the court then turns to the 1st part of question b. one which the to the cold consider is israel measures and to comes with and legislation amount to as well treating palestinians differently constitute systematic. dennis discrimination, the court considers the is rainy policies and practices amount. next, ation of launch pulse of occupied territory. as the quotes considers

as rouse, transfer that flows into the west bank and east jerusalem, a violation of the 4th geneva convention. just some of the findings being read out by the 27th presiding judge of the international court of justice. he went on to say that the court considers israel is the use of natural resources of occupied tote treat, incompatible with international law. and the court finds all the quote is not convinced that the extension of is really loyal to the westbank in east jerusalem is justified. well, no, i said i am is continuing now to read out those findings. but in french, this is all part of the case that was submitted in 2022 concerning the legality of israel's occupation of the

palestinian parent tree. i think we've got now step voss and so step just to put everything into context. we've heard a lot of findings so far, but this is not over yet. writes was do we still need to get to the final conclusion? is that right? just exactly. yeah, we're still waiting for that, but meanwhile, we've heard of course that the president of the court has basically said all the arguments that were brought forward by these $52.00 states including swede international organizations during the hearings were valid. he has called them one by one s, you also set displacement to exploitation, the set of policies that he's really critical about to set. all these policies have note that the have no concluded to being violating international law of the geneva

convention, the un charter. and he also said that the israel's arguments basically for this occupation, meaning that they need this occupation for some military purposes, are completely not valid to that he actually called, if not with permanent occupation, with just basically the same as an annexation. he said by these policies, israel has created an indefinite and also a reversible situation for the palestinian people. so it's sounds until now that all the arguments have been accepted by this court. so step just to put this into perspective and to simplify it. so view is it may not be in tool of the legalese. this is where we're at. so father cold has gone through some of the objections to it, getting involved in this case. and it's pretty much dismissed all of those objections that it does have jurisdiction. it does have the right to respond to the requests

from the general assembly. and so far, as you said, up until this point, it's been finding in favor of those states who have been pointing the finger as well. so things are not going very well for as well as the bottom line, right? are absolutely, and this is going to be a landmark advisory opinion from this, from the highest courts, which is non binding, but still will have the implications, of course not only for as well because there's 2 questions here that have been asked by the un general assembly it is, is the legality of the occupation, but also what are the consequences of this if it's a legal for all the states involved for the united nation. so this is basically a question to all the country. so we have relationships with it's around being its trade or military relationship. if this is a deemed illegals call illegal by the highest court,

will these countries i'm able continue to and even then able this elect a legal situation or will they draw consequences may be sanctions or other consequences from this situation. so this is really a main question that many experts are asking themselves after we finish hearing what the president is going to say. this will be on the table. all right, thanks so much to step vice and let's go, is it jeffrey? nice now is the human rights spanish, the lab, the prosecution of form, a sort of in need of some of the envelopes of each of you ends international criminal tribunal for the, for me, the somebody joins us live from canterbury in the u. k. good to have you with us. so watching what's happened so far, does it appear that the quote is establishing the grounds so far it looks like the quote is establishing the grounds point by point that would take it in the direction of, of finding that will, will not be very favorable to as well, i think we can, we can safely say at this point, right,

or correct can i think you can safely say now that it's going to be obsolete domain is shame on the particular grounds referred to by your previous contribution. and i can probably summarize some of them. i didn't hear the officer by the box, right? there was a brief breaking transmission on saturday. i can tell you, jeffrey, let me refer to you from my notes. what they said about that. the quote concludes measures taken by israel in the occupied palestinian territory, do treat palestinians to differently, and it constitutes systematic discrimination. and it went on to refer to a breach of optical 3 of the foot. okay. so if this isn't part time, then i already very bad and already but very bad because of earlier warnings, but i have a cool that israel has refused to recognize and respect. this is

a truly significant development. every time explains why and how i see it as being significant it for a long time. there's being real concern that the so called, well, the support environment. so cool. well, the legal system has always been prepared to pay a 2nd fiddle to be called down by political pressure as a result of what's happening. but it's actually ukraine and more particularly, perhaps in israel, gaza the, to see the international quotes. this cool was tough, known criminal code as well as the top criminal cold have emerged from periods of so, oh, no activity that make sure that they all prepared to do that, which for they were set up to do, are now literally they've done that because they realize that otherwise be seen is

useless all because they genuinely want to do, it doesn't matter that doing it, it's something the public would want. and it puts the conference that have been suppressing the application of international law in particular the united states of america. but also, i'm sorry to say great britain, who under the last administration was still trying to stop in the international cooling, quote, from applying for wrestling, says you will remember in the last couple of weeks before the general election is putting them in a very, very much more difficult position. they've gone away with saying politics, thomas little, for decades. and suddenly, really, they've got to say that again. well, let's look forward. what might the general assembly do? want us to get mike to, particularly if there's a finding of apartheid is look back to what happened with south africa. but it was suspended from activity within the united nations by the general assembly. it

wasn't started out of who were together, it was suspended. they couldn't take pos and debates. and so now is the united states of america, whether or not 100 pump. going to say we don't care about that, we support is around come, what may is what we can do, what it likes, or is it going finally to recognize what's been going on in his riley, in many areas. very clearly breeches to me know and it's coming up has israel because it has a suspect, 2 to guest all hopes that they would always be protected from the know this junk from what we've heard of so far. and we're here when i get wrong to listening to the rest of it, is going to blow that defense that hope at least drew away altogether. you can not have the united states of america. oh, great, but little phone. so any of these other countries then probably who being behind

slow speed work was the international law. you cannot have them overlooking this as one is it will be all those. so is what we're going to suffer. now what are the result correspondent says he's getting the software because of trade sanctions to masses of that. so top content of the stage has been this way. you can see, but it's kind of soft and of course it's getting to some time. it's inevitably the approach that will be taken by countries cause the problem going bul between israel and casa jeffrey, i've got a whole bunch of questions here about the implications and the accusations of complicit. seeing what it may mean, not only for us or about its allies, but just before we go that fall, just to clarify, we are going to hear all we not from the quote today, the final on. so to the big question, which was put to the quote by the general assembly on whether israel's occupation

is illegal, not right, then the must be a finding, a final finding at the end. i think he's speaking still in french right now, but the cold must today make that final determination. and it's non binding advisory opinion, correct? correct. subject turn. just in fact, i think he made current here at the beginning. he's making the findings on the basis of policies, not on the basis of factual every day for findings, a small difference in the mind of many people. but i think he's making that distinction. okay, let me jump in that and i'll space given what we've heard. so far, it would you say it's fair to say is looking increasingly difficult for the quote to come to a finding so far that the occupation is not the legal in the manner in which the court has so far addressed all of the grounds for its final conclusion showed how might prove to be wrong, but it would be very surprised if it does not find on the basis of the policy. it's

considering the information to download from. okay, i apologize jeffrey, but we've got we've got to jump back in and listen. now we'll, we'll come back to in the moment, to patient patient to the court emphasized that the obligation scrolling from israel's internationally wrongful act do not reduce it from it's continuing to to perform to international obligations which is conduct isn't breach of specifically, israel remains bound to comply with its obligation to respect the rights of the post. and if people do self determination and its obligations under international human, a humanitarian law and international human rights law. the court then turns to the legal consequences of israel's internationally wrongful ex, in the occupied palestinian territory. as regards other states, the court upstairs that the obligations violated to by israel include certain

obligations or homeless among which are the obligation to respect the rights of the public, to new people, to self determination and the obligation arising from the crew condition of the use of force to choir territory, as well as certain of its obligations under international humanitarian do an international human rights flaw. with regard to the right to self determination, the court considers that why that is for the general assembly and the security council to pronounce on the boot ality is required to ensure an end to israel's illegal present. cindy occupied palestinian territory and the full the realization of the right to the palestinian people to self determination. all states must cooperate with united nations to put to these modalities into effect as regards the pro condition of the cause of the equation of territory by force.

taking note of the resolutions of the security council general assembly, the court itself to view the member states are under an obligation not to recognize any changes in the physical character or demographic composition. the institutional structure or stages of the territory occupied by israel. on the 5th of june, 1967, including jerusalem, east to jerusalem. except as agree to bind the parties to the conflict between negotiations and to distinguish their dealings with israel between the territory of the state of israel and the palestinian territory occupied with 1967 more over the course can suggest that view of the character and importance of the right to the topic agents involved, all states are under an obligation not to recognize this legal situation arising from the unlawful presence of youth really be occupied palestinian territory. they

are also under no obligation not to render 8 or assistance in maintaining the situation created by a history of illegal presence and be occupied palestinian territory. it is for all states while respecting the charge with united nations and international to ensure that any impeachment resulting from the legal presence of israel in the occupied palestinian territory to the exercise of the protestant. and people of its right to the self determination is brought to an end. in addition to all the states court is due to the 4th geneva convention half the obligation while respecting the charter of united nations of international to ensure compliance by israel with international humanitarian law. as embodied in that convention. the duty of non recognition specified earlier also applies to international organizations, including the united nations and few of the serious breaches of applications are

homeless under international law. the obligation not to recognize this legal, the situation arising from the unlawful presence of israel in the occupied palestinian territory. and the application to distinguish in dealings with israel between the territory of israel and occupied palestinian territory. apply also to the united state the united nations. finally, the courts of the few that the precise modalities to bring to an end, israel's unlawful presence in the occupied to publish the new territory. it's a matter to be dealt with by the general assembly, which requested this opinion as well as the security code. so we're listening to the 27th, the president of the international court of justice know us to align. he's reading out now in french, and it's being translated into english, the findings of the quote. so fall, this is not the final ruling on this non binding advisory opinion,

but they all going through the claims that will put the full, the quotes and some of the grounds. and so fall the court has, well, it's basically found in favor of a lot of the objections to his right. the policy visit the, the transfer effect was visited. the israel is use of natural resources, also the amount, the annexation of palestinian territory. and the treatment of palestinians, which it considered to be systematic, denise discrimination. so we're still waiting, of course for the the final answer to the big question of why the israel is occupation is illegal or not, but the way it's going it definitely does not look very good for us. right. let's go back now to jeffrey. nice. he's a human rights barrister who loved the prosecution of former serbian nita slowing

down. the last of the chat view ends international criminal tribunal. and the former yugoslavia joins us once again live from canterbury in the united kingdom. and so jeffrey, while we're waiting of calls full, the quotes have come to its final conclusion. at this point with all of the findings which the court has made so far, this is going to be, is it not that it will be very difficult for israel to continue to function? so shall we say as it has before in political and legal circles as it yes, it will. and also in commercial circles because you will pick up on the okay, i'm terribly sorry jeffrey. i keep doing this to ask you a question, but i've got to go back now because i understand that getting close to the point where they make that final ruling in favor. but then some judges from the gulf of the use of sway. monday there was so nice be side

was, but on gomez of little cleveland or a score. lots against vice president sit within the by 11 votes before he's over the open in the state of visit is continued presence in bill 2533 is unlawful in favor, but it's been so judge is useful for a month that he us so not the charge was but on domain suitably to cleveland floods. again, vice president sit within the judges from abraham buddha by 11 votes to forward is over the opening in the state of is it a is on that and obligation to bring an

n plus side to bring for an end. it's unlawful presence and dokie pod, but it's thing instead of 3 as rapidly as possible. mc. but as in some judges use of sh way. but very do a saw was the charge was brad good ways that i'm glad to be able to let a gains by spreads and sit within. they just, i'm able to help with this this by 14 volts to one is over the opinion that the 5th visitor is under and obligation to seize immediate c o and you'll supplement activities. and so if i create or set to go to some of the occupied by the city and 33 in favor. but then so judges from call a bit of home use of way button. very good. i saw those, the charge was brand gomez related to cleveland. us cool. that's

a games by presence supposed to be by 14 votes. the one is over the opinion that the state of visitors has the obligation to make any but ation for the damage goes to own in nature or the good persons concerned in doki. but the 2nd and 3rd in favor, but has been set on judges from the able to home use of sway. monday us our not the charge was brad miserably. the cleveland. judas cool flats again. but by then, so within the by 12 votes, the city is over the open in bed or states on the, on the give. so not 34 with eyes as the good the situation, i think from the unlawful presence of the seat opposite and occupied by the city

instead of 3, and not to the age for assistance in maintaining visits. v, as in created by the continued presence of the state of visitors in delta 5. but it seems that it's in favor but has insight on junctions dump youself. sweet monday us our most sides was brand gomez robledo. cleveland floods or against vice president said within the judge is able to home by 12 force. the city is of the opinion that international organizations, including united nations and obligation not political belongs as the good the situation that i think from the unlawful presence of the state is it a, in the occupied. but assuming that it's in favor, but it's instead of judges from co do so. sway bunbury, it was,

i was not the charge was brand laser blade to cleveland flat against bunk beds and fit within the dodges. abraham desk by 12 boys to 3 is of the opinion that united nations, and especially the general assembly, which requested this opinion. and the security council should consider that they put aside some of that. it is and further action required to bring to an end as rapidly as possible, the unlawful presence of the state office of the in the occupied by the city instead of in favor beds and some judges from the use of choice. one body with i will not be charged with brand commands that are black. ready cleveland, that's against but i didn't stick with you and the judge is able to how i

should now call up on the edge. so the 3 the opposite. this part of the open unit then the sort of good. if you mr. registrar for these reasons. the quote on it down to mislead finds that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested to buy 14 votes to one decides to comply with the request for an advisory opinion in favor to mr. some president touches tonka abraham uses mrs way, bundari estimate. heres of us, i will note that charles, west bronze, thomas robledo, cleveland rescued claudie against vice president, 1733 by 11 votes. the full is of the opinion, but the states of israel's continued presence in the occupied palestinian territory is unlawful in favor. presidents alone,

judges use of troy bundari usaa no to charles wes bronk. tommy's robledo, cleveland cloudy against the vice president subroutine de judges, tonka abraham rescue full by 11 votes to full is of the opinion that the state of israel is under and obligation to bring an end to its own law for presents and the occupied post. an entire tree has rapidly as possible in favor president salam judges use of to a and so that we have a historic moment the international court of justice, the finding and it's advisory opinion is rails continued presence in the occupied palestinian territory is unlawful. the court president and the last time when tom to say the quoted, also found that all states are under an obligation to distinguish between israel

and the occupied territory. and that the state of israel is under an obligation to end its presence in the occupied territory to cease immediately, all settlements and to evacuate specialist. and it went on to even cold on israel to make reparation full damage caused by the occupation and to call on international organizations, including the united nations, not to recognize these riley legality of this very presence in. they occupied power train to make that distinction. i think we can go to jeffrey. nice. now he's the human rights virus. does. i've been saying is that the prosecution or former soviet leader slow but in the last of age at the you and international criminal tribunal for the for me, this lobby joins us live from the united kingdom. and jeffrey, we had the key lines. uh, this quote has found in its advisory opinion that israel's presence as an occupying

pallet is illegal in the occupied palestinian territory. right? yes. this is a, do cents is not a surprise. you can go on beaching up a small group of people because you have some great pi behind you of the united states of america in countries like great britain and others for so long. but eventually i visited all is going to be seen to be hopeless. and of no value a tool overall will turn in your favor values of what has happened. there are many things to be said about this, but the 1st thing i think there can be said, of course, i realize how to sierra says a file for a wider audience than just great britain. the great britain consort could come to it. so this new government consult account itself as fortunate because it could accept everything that's here. it could use that to justify the change of the

tone and also the changes statement between yeah, so may, when he was campaigning, i'm to full then let's say we accept all this now. and that might well neutralize. a great deal of the unfortunate, very pa, for all positions on behalf of the palestinians. more generally under allow us to look for the future with, with a peaceful approach on the basis through all countries except it's even america. now people might try and delay to say it's got to go through the general assembly for us. so to the security council, but know if i would allow me, mr. lenny or sexiest alma, i would say thank you for this. we're, we understandable. we respect the little we will comply with the law and to hope that will lead european leaders all to do the same thing. really not just

a volume of approval and activity. so even america possibly narrow, they may not be able to protect israel. i'm fairly, in the way that this training moving to jeffrey, we got to point out of course that this is a non binding advisory opinion. what are the chances of it all the possibility of prospects of it ever being enforced is how to say where when it was just a matter of who's getting sort of seeing things, the role and so on, the earlier decisions it took kind of notice of these decisions go much further, not least because a direct steve, not his actions and of the congress has to do things. and by implication to express the i can't remember the wording, say that the commercial activity is not to help. and for example, the settlement process has to be paid. i don't think it's going to be that easy, completely to disregard that.