聯合國最高法院將就以色列佔領發表意見

The United Nations' top court is poised to deliver a landmark opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories, a decision that could have significant implications for Israel's control over the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), based in The Hague, Netherlands, has been examining this issue since early last year. The court was specifically asked to provide its perspective on Israel's policies and practices towards the Palestinians and the legal status of the occupation. Should the court find the occupation illegal, it would mark the first time the ICJ has taken such a stance. Although the court's advisory opinion is not legally binding, it will carry substantial political weight. Israel occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip during the 1967 Middle East war. In 2005, Israel withdrew its troops and settlers from Gaza but retained control over its airspace, shared border, and shoreline. Despite this pullout, the UN continues to regard Gaza as part of the occupied territories. As the occupying power, Israel's actions in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza are governed by a detailed set of international laws designed to protect the civilian population. Before the hearings commenced in February, Israel issued a statement declaring it did not recognize the legitimacy of the ICJ's discussion. Israel described the move, initiated by the State of Palestine at the UN, as part of a Palestinian attempt to dictate the results of the political settlement of the Israel-Palestinian conflict without negotiations. Consequently, Israel declined to participate in the oral hearings. Numerous countries and organizations submitted their opinions, with the vast majority asserting that the occupation was illegal and urging the ICJ to declare it as such. The United States, Israel's closest ally, called on the court to carefully calibrate its advice and refrain from issuing an opinion that calls for a unilateral, immediate, and unconditional withdrawal by Israel without accounting for Israel's legitimate security needs. The Palestinian Authority's foreign minister told the court that his people had endured colonialism and apartheid. He argued that the prolonged Israeli occupation of Palestine was intended to accomplish the complete disappearance of Palestine and the destruction of the Palestinian people. International lawyer Philippe Sands, a member of the Palestinian legal team, told the BBC that this ICJ case is as significant as it gets in terms of legal outcomes and solutions that must ultimately be found. If the ICJ issues an advisory opinion, it will then go to the UN General Assembly, which will decide how to respond, including the option of adopting a resolution. Such a resolution would be significant and could serve as a catalyst for negotiations and set the legal parameters for a future negotiated settlement. If the court determines that Israel's occupation is illegal, it will instruct all UN bodies and nations to refrain from supporting or contributing to the current situation. This ruling could potentially have far-reaching trade implications, but the most significant consequence would be the impact on the legitimacy of Israel's justification for remaining in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Israel claims sovereignty over the entirety of Jerusalem, which it considers its indivisible capital, a stance not accepted by the vast majority of the international community. Additionally, Israel has constructed approximately 160 settlements housing around 700,000 Jews in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. These settlements are deemed illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this. The ICJ case being heard on Friday is separate from another active case brought to the court by South Africa, accusing Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians during the Gaza war.