
Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, President of Shurat HaDin, speaks about the meaning and implications of the decision that the International Court of Justice in The Hague (UCJ) intends to publish at the end of the week, on Israel's conduct in Judea and Samaria.
The appeal to the ICJ, explains Darshan-Leitner, was made at the request of the UN’s General Assembly and following a request submitted by the Palestinian Authority (PA), which received an automatic majority in the General Assembly, which forwarded the request to the Court.
"The PA requested a decision on the legal implications of Israel's practices in Judea and Samaria," claiming that the State of Israel is de facto annexing the territories of Judea and Samaria and violating human rights," says Darshan-Leitner.
On Friday, the court will present its decision on this matter. Is this a binding decision in any way? Apparently not, but it could have political consequences for Israel. "The court's decision is not directly binding. Apparently, it is only a decision. Israel did not agree to the procedure, nor was it asked to agree, knowing in advance that it would disagree. However, this decision could be extremely problematic for Israel, which is already under the international community's magnifying glass and has been attacked and accused of committing war crimes and genocide."
According to Darshan-Leitner, "the decision may provide additional reinforcement and legitimacy for those who are seeking to harm and boycott Israel as well as apply sanctions against it also in regard to Judea and Samaria.” She further states that there is also a concern that the decision "may even include recommendations and steps that the UN should take against Israel.”