nam 22 uu 4500 10.59704/6f4cd94baead4484 DE-Verfassungsblog cr||||| 241013s2024||||xx#|||||o|||| ||| 0|eng|| 10.59704/6f4cd94baead4484 doi eng 342 23 Bastaki, Jinan Author aut Limiting ‘Security’ as a Justification in the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion Bastaki, Jinan Verfassungsblog 2024-10-13 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier While international law accepts that States may employ otherwise prohibited actions in exceptional circumstances and within certain constraints, the Advisory Opinion firmly affirms that security cannot justify illegal actions such as annexation or prolonged occupation. The rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination, cannot be compromised by security claims. The Advisory Opinion serves to limit State practices predicated upon security when those practices violate essential rights and when the security claim is based upon an illegal situation created by the very State which invokes security concerns. CC BY-SA 4.0 International Court of Justice International Law Israel-Hamas War Völkerrecht (DE-588)4063693-8 gnd Völkerrecht Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH Verfassungsblog 2366-7044 https://verfassungsblog.de/limiting-security-as-a-justification-in-the-icjs-advisory-opinion/ raw object