nam 22 uu 4500 10.59704/62e7e2c461ae93d8 DE-Verfassungsblog cr||||| 241017s2024||||xx#|||||o|||| ||| 0|eng|| 10.59704/62e7e2c461ae93d8 doi eng 342 23 Hostovsky Brandes, Tamar Author aut The ICJ Advisory Opinion and Israeli Law - The ICJ Advisory opinion and the duty to distinguish between Israel and the Occupied Territories Hostovsky Brandes, Tamar Verfassungsblog 2024-10-17 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This post examines the relationship between the Advisory Opintion and Israeli law with respect to the duty to distinguish between Israel and the OPT. While the Opinion requires States to distinguish between Israel and the OPT in their dealings with Israel, and to omit acts that may strengthen Israel’s hold of the Territories, calls for such distinction are a civil tort under Israeli law, and those making them can be denied entry to Israel. As a result, Israelis are unlikely to support the Opinion. This will contribute to the growing gap between the international discourse and the domestic discourse in Israel with respect to the OPT. CC BY-SA 4.0 ICJ International Court of Justice International Law Israel and occupied territory Israel-Gaza War OPT United States. International Court of Justice occupation (DE-588)16119456-4 gnd United States. International Court of Justice Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH Verfassungsblog 2366-7044 https://verfassungsblog.de/the-icj-advisory-opinion-and-israeli-law/ raw object