THE HAGUE, Netherlands, 24 February 2004 — Palestinians presented an impassioned case to the world court yesterday against the Israeli separation barrier in the West Bank, while Israel appealed to world opinion to ignore the proceedings it called inherently unfair.
The International Court of Justice began three days of hearings on the legality of the barrier slicing through Palestinian territory, bringing Israel’s occupation policies before an international tribunal for the first time.
The General Assembly asked the UN’s highest judicial body last December to give a nonbinding advisory opinion on the legality of the network of walls, razor-wire fences and electronic monitors, now one-third completed.
Though the court cannot demand action, the Palestinians hoped for a clear-cut judgment that would build irresistible pressure on Israel to dismantle the barrier, which is disrupting the lives of hundreds of thousands of West Bank residents.
Under international pressure, Israel has begun making minor changes in the route of the barrier.
“This wall is not about security. It is about entrenching the occupation and the de facto annexation of large areas of the Palestinian land,” the chief Palestinian delegate, Nasser Al-Kidwa, told the tribunal.
“This wall, if completed, will leave the Palestinian people with only half of the West Bank within isolated, non-contiguous, walled enclaves,” Al-Kidwa told the 15-judge panel.
Israel, the United States and the European countries stayed away from the oral hearings to underscore their distrust of the process.
As the arguments unfolded in the oak-paneled Grand Hall of Justice of the 90-year-old Peace Palace, it became apparent that the Palestinians hoped to put Israel’s 37-year occupation — not just its security measures — on trial.
The construction of the barrier “confirms the attitude of the occupying power. They want to annex territories, to partition, divide the territory and make it difficult for the people to live there,” Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League, told reporters on the fringes of the hearing.
Speaking for the Palestinians, eminent Arab and international advocates gave a three-hour presentation to the judges — garbed in formal black robes and seated behind a long raised table — of the legal and human arguments against the barrier.
Vaughan Lowe, an Oxford law professor, said Israel was violating international law by seizing land, destroying property, and changing the status of the occupied territories. Israel “cannot cast off all legal and moral constraints simply by calling it security,” said the British jurist.
Stephanie Koury, another Palestinian delegate, presented graphs and photos showing how the barrier has separated families and made it difficult for Palestinians to lead normal lives.
In its written submission, Israel said the UN General Assembly referral to the court is “absolutely silent” on the issue of violence. “It is a travesty and reflects a great prejudice and imbalance within the requesting organ.”
Like Israel, the United States argued in a written brief that the court could inadvertently undermine the US-backed road map, and urged the 15 judges to refrain from taking a stand.
Outside the baroque Peace Palace, more than 1,000 pro-Palestinian demonstrators marched from the Dutch Parliament to the seat of the court, chanting and carrying photographs of Palestinian children killed by Israeli soldiers.
