Last December, the UN General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to make a ruling on “Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. Sensing danger, Israel looked for a way to block the ruling. Canada has joined the fight to help Israel avoid condemnation by the court. Read more, and hear a short interview with international human rights lawyer Michael Lynk….
On 30 December 2022, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted resolution 77/247 requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ on the question of Palestine. The request asked the Court to provide a legal opinion on two specific questions,
(a) What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967
(b) How do the policies and practices of Israel affect the legal status of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all States and the United Nations from this status?
Prior to accepting the case, the ICJ invited interested UN member states to make submissions by July 2023.
On July 14th Canada quietly released its submisson, arguing that the ICJ should not act on the decision of the General Assembly. Curiously the two reasons that Canada gave in its 6 page submission to the court bear a marked similarity to those given by the State of Israel itself.
Canada offered two main reasons for opposing the referral to the ICJ. Both are eyebrow raising.
First – that Israel does not agree to the process. The Canadian document notes that “it is a fundamental principle of the ICJ that the settlement of contentious cases by the court requires the consent of the states involved”. Canada has not always been so firm in supporting this principle however. On June 12th it called on the court to rule on human rights violations in Syria, and on June 29th it asked the court to condemn Russia for the downing of an aircraft. Neither Syria nor Iran were consulted.
Second – that this is not a matter for the UN General Assembly, but the Security Council. This is a curious argument for Israel to raise with the court and even more curious that Canada has adopted it. Israel has long used UN General Assembly resolution 181 which gave more than 50% of Mandate Palestine to a Jewish State as its “legal birth certificate”. To say that the UN General Assembly has the right to “create” Israel but not the right to criticize it, lacks logic.
CTIP spoke to international lawyer Michael Lynk about what is behind Canada’s submission.
Canada Talks Israel Palestine (CTIP) is the weekly newsletter of Peter Larson, Chair of the Ottawa Forum on Israel/Palestine (OFIP). It aims to promote a serious discussion in Canada about Canada’s response to the complicated and emotional Israel/Palestine issue with a focus on the truth, clear analysis and human rights for all. Readers with different points of view are invited to make comment.
Want to learn more about us? Go to Ottawa Forum on Israel/Palestine.ca
Canada Talks Israel/Palestine 
Canada’s position is correct. The General Assembly cannot make international law. Israel was not founded as a result of resolution 181. Israel declared independence when the British mandate expired on May 15, 1948. Resolution 181 offered a basis on which Jews and Arabs could collaborate in the creation of two successor states in the vacuum created by the expiry of the mandate (Resolution 181 deferred the resolution of the status of Jerusalem for 10 years.) For this to have occurred would have required the agreement of the Palestinian Arabs which was not forthcoming.
Resolution 181 was not Israel’s birth certificate. Resolution 181 was an unsuccessful attempt to provide a path to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between Jews and Arabs in Palestine. Israel’s independence was established only with the success of its armed forces which staved off an attempted genocide of Palestinian Jews, initiated by the Palestinian Arabs and the infiltrators of the Arab Liberation Army, and then joined on May 15, 1948, by the Syria, Transjordan, Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt.
As the Israeli poet famously wrote, “We (the 6000 Israeli dead) are the silver platter on which the Jewish state was delivered.” This was an ironic riposte to those who complained at the time that Palestine was being handed to the Jews on a silver platter.
As for the court, like all international bodies it has a built-in anti-Israel bias, as long as the authoritarian and Islamic bloc votes together to direct UN attention to everything that Israel does. This is convenient for them, because many of the states making up the bloc are guilty of conduct much worse than the Israeli behaviour they scrutinize so diligently. In addition, it is true that the court requires the consent of the parties before taking up an issue. Given the bias Israel faces in international bodies it would be foolish to agree to let the court rule on these matters.
I’m grateful that the Canadian government takes the entirely correct position that it does on this question.
Hey David, thanks for taking the time to respond.
I would like to give my perspective in 2 parts.
1. You may not feel that UN Resolution 181 is Israel’s “birth certificate”. But Ben Gurion and the founders of Israel did. Resolution 181 is mentioned expressly in the May 1948 Israeli Declaration of Independence. I think this excerpt makes it clear what the Israeli leadership thought of the resolution:
“On the 29th November, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the establishment of a Jewish State in Eretz-Israel; the General Assembly required the inhabitants of Eretz-Israel to take such steps as were necessary on their part for the implementation of that resolution. This recognition by the United Nations of the right of the Jewish people to establish their State is irrevocable.”
2. The second part more fundamental. Why is Israel afraid of going before the IJC? Why is Canada afraid of a ruling from the IJC? For that matter why are you? The legal arguments are one thing, but the basis of this is that Israel fears that before an international court it will stand accused of violating human rights and international law. Why are they, and you, seeking legal ways to avoid prosecution?
Because there is ample evidence, in my judgment that Israel could not get a fair hearing before an international court.
An indication is that when Fatou Bensouda, the prosecutor for the ICC was asked to investigate whether Israel should be prosecuted for its actions on the Mavi Marmara and she found that Israel had not done so, the body overseeing her work repeatedly demanded that she look at the evidence again. It took many years and repeated revisiting of the case before her judgment in the matter prevailed.
A more tractable person might well have been pressured into bringing a case that was not justified as the political pressure to do that is very strong.
Hey David,
Of course judges and be biased – either way. There is a process for selecting judges. And as you point out, there is a system for review. I am sure that at the ICJ there is a similar process. It will not depend on the bias of one person.
What international body would you prefer to make a judgement on Israeli actions? Or is the whole world anti-Semitic?
There is a built in majority in international bodies dedicated to singling out Israel for condemnation. For example, the UN body dedicated to women’s rights condemned only one country this year. Was it Afghanistan, where women are no longer allowed to go to school? Was it Iran, where women are jailed for removing their hijab?
Nope, it was Israel, where women have always had equal rights under the law. It’s impossible to take these international bodies seriously when it comes to Israel and Zionism.
I’m on a plane to Israel as I write this. On Saturday night I will join hundreds of thousands of protesters, demanding an end to the extreme measures being advanced by Israel’s current right wing government. That’s another right which Israelis have, which doesn’t exist in many of the places that sit in judgment of Israel in international bodies.
Hello David,
I support those Israelis who are angry over the direction of the Israeli government.
Are you Israeli? If so, go for it.
If you are Canadian, I would encourage you to raise your voice in Canada in criticism of both the Canadian government and of establishment Jewish institutions (like CIJA) which turn a blind eye to Israel’s growing racism.
Of course I know it is possible to be both Israeli and Canadian. In which case, I encourage you to join protests there, and write letters or opinion pieces here (as NIFC, CFPN, Andrew Cohen and others do.)
Safe travels. Peter
The Zionists are stealing Palestinian land and denying the Palestinians the right to a state of their own. That deserves IMO condemnation by the UN. The UN has the courage to stand up to Israel, unlike Canada and the US that give unconditional support to Israel.
The Canadian government’s lack of principle and lack of courage is an embarrassment but I assume they would not survive the domestic political fall out if they were to act differently.
Frankly, as I see it, it’s all about bribes and CIJA have the resources in spades. Pleading with government and MPs is like expecting something free from a vending machine.
Short of the cash to pay for justice, one has to take the gloves off. CIJA is a sponcer of state brutality against children and journalists. Honest Reporting is journalistic terrorism. Trudeau is willing to sacrifice a child’s life for a terrorist state’s buck. All arguably true and descriptive. Are there differing points of view on murdering a child or a journalist?
What Israel is doing in Palestine differs only in scale from Russia in Ukraine. When Putin launched his killing spree Bob Rae said he lost his moral compass. As a double agent he should know.
Nearing the twilight of my 9th decade as a citizen of a major settler/colonialist state still actively unrepentant, I find the state of justice in Canada depressing on all fronts.
Bob Pflug
Canada will stand with #Apartheid #israel as long as the Liberals are in power due to the influence ultra-zionists like Irwin Cotler and his ilk have on their party. And if the Conservatives get elected the Christian Right zionist will continue to demand the #Apartheid #israel boot licking they got under Harper … So I’m real pessimist for the fight for Palestinian Human Rights at the canadian federal level …
Things might be brighter at the provincial and municipal level … I.E. in Québec where Ruba Ghazal is a MNA from Palestinian heritage fighting to educate people on Palestinian Human Rights … So, IMO, if there is a change in Canadian position, it will come from the base up or with brand new leadership in the Liberal and NDP parties as Consertative will always be submitted to the will of christian zionsts.
Sadly, with the Trudeau Liberals in power Canada will again stand with aparthied Isreal just as it continues to stand with Alberta and it’s exports of toxic fossil fuels as our country burns from primarily fossil fuel generated climate crisis.
One has to assume some Liberal MPs depend on votes and campaign dollars from Israeli government-supporting Canadians in eastern Canada, just as it will accept campaign contributions from fossil fuel generated climate change Deniers too.
We continue to be led down the garden path by a man capable of speaking through both sides of his mouth at the same time.
Of course Israel wants the Security Council to litigate this request from the UN General Assembly. It knows that any resolutions that adversely affect Israel will be vetoed by the USA. With Uncle Sam’s unconditional support for Israel (followed by Canada), it is difficult, if not impossible, for the Palestinian people to achieve justice at the UN.
I find it distressing when you are encouraged to follow an issue, yet when you take the effort your comment is nowhere to be found and new posts show others have since had their comments accepted.
I don’t pretend to be an expert on anything, but I do realize when the doors have been slammed shut there is a good chance your opinion has been shuffled out for ???convenience or other inconvenient reason. I would have assumed a post offered would at least get a no thank you from the host.
Hey Allan,
i am happy that you comment from time to time, but ask that you be a little more indulgent. I am not full-time and dont always get to reviewing comments every day. I see that less than 24 hours had passed before you got impatient.
I am happy to accept any thoughtful comment – even if I don’t agree. In fact, I welcome it, and am happy to engage in discussion. (e.g. See my recent exchange with David Roytenberg.)
I do trash comments that are ad hominem, or use vile language, or are racist, etc.
Hello droytenberg
I acknowledge that the Jewish people are an indigenous people to the Holy Land. Do you acknowledge that the Palestinians are an indigenous people to the land of Palestine?