18 October 2024
“There is only one morally, legally and strategically defensible choice: an arms embargo”
Five Questions to Janina Dill Continue reading >>
1 
13 October 2024
Security Considerations, the Duty to End Belligerent Occupations and the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israeli practices and policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
This contribution discusses three possible rationales for the Court’s rejection of the relevance of Israel’s security concerns: Lack of proof of serious and legitimate security concerns by Israel, the insufficiency of broad security concerns to justify the continued use of force, and the insufficiency of broad security concerns to deny realization of Palestinian self-determination. As long as international law doctrine on the duty to end a belligerent occupation despite the prevalence of serious security concerns remains contested, and as long as security conditions in the region remain extremely unstable, it is unlikely that a withdrawal will be deemed practicable Continue reading >>11 October 2024
The Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Policies and Practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
This post analyses the separation between jus ad bellum / in bello as arising from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ. This separation was challenged by many States appearing before the Court, some of which implied that Israel’s policies and practices, as violations of jus in bello, rendered the occupation unlawful under jus ad bellum. The Court ultimately reaffirmed the separation with a twofold argument, namely qualifying the ‘legality of the occupation’ as a jus ad bellum question, and framing Israel’s policies and practices (prolonged occupation, annexation, and settlement policy) as violations of jus ad bellum. Continue reading >>
0
10 October 2024
A Seismic Change
It is no understatement to say that the 19 July 2024 ICJ Advisory Opinion constitutes a seismic change in the international law and practice on the question of Palestine. In one fell swoop, the ICJ has shifted what was hitherto an almost exclusive focus of the international community on how Israel has administered its 57-year occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory under International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, to the requirement that Israel end its occupation of that territory as “rapidly as possible”. Continue reading >>10 October 2024
The Legality of the Occupation and the Problem of Double Effect
The conflict between Israel and Palestine, or more accurately, between the two Peoples, has persisted for over a century. A tragic reminder of the unbearable costs of this conflict is the deadly October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel, and the ensuing war, which has led to horrific consequences, with thousands of Israelis and Palestinians killed, many severely injured, and extensive damage to the civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. In these circumstances, an important question arises: what role should international law and international tribunals play in mitigating the grave harm to all those involved in the conflict? Continue reading >>
0
04 July 2024
All Eyes on Sudan (too)
This article is an attempt to add layers to the discussions of ongoing mass atrocities committed in several parts of the world by discussing an under-reported situation of large scale violence unfolding in Sudan since April 2023, in the hope that the ‘international community’ can address multiple catastrophic situations with similar urgency, mobilise for justice for all peoples, end the culture of impunity, and eventually shift the discourse towards the structural causes of such large-scale violence in different parts of the world. Continue reading >>
0
16 May 2024
Gaza, Artificial Intelligence, and Kill Lists
The Israeli army has developed an artificial intelligence-based system called “Lavender”. This approach promises faster and more accurate targeting; however, human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) have warned of deficits in responsibility for violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). In the following, we will examine these concerns and show how responsibility for violations of IHL remains attributable to a state that uses automated or semi-automated systems in warfare. Continue reading >>04 May 2024
The Battle for Immunity
The International Law Commission is preparing to continue discussions on Draft Articles on the Immunity of State Officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction at its forthcoming 75th summer session. This article focuses on two issues: the scope of immunity and its exceptions. These issues, which are widely discussed internationally, are far from being resolved. In this state of flux, a common ground is needed to move forward, which I try to outline in this blog post. Continue reading >>
0
19 April 2024
Without a Doubt
The German Federal Court of Justice recently announced that the exclusion of functional immunity for foreign state officials in cases of international crimes is “without a doubt” part of customary international law. Like many others in academic literature, we agree with this conclusion – the German government would be well advised to embrace it and put an end to its long-standing ambiguous position on the matter. Continue reading >>
0
13 March 2024
Conspicuously Absent
Nicaragua alleges that Germany violates the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law by assisting Israel and also by failing to prevent violations of these bodies of law. It requests the International Court of Justice to indicate provisional measures, which would oblige Germany inter alia to stop assisting Israel. While the Court may be barred from exercising its jurisdiction over Nicaragua’s claims relating to the Genocide Convention it may be able to hear the claims regarding Germany’s duties under IHL. Continue reading >>
0