CourinternatideJustice
EnregisauGreffel:
----------
.ternationalcourtof '3JANce ,200 /J 6
Filedin theRegis:ryon
BEFORETHE
INTERNATIONAL COURT OFJUSTICE
Requesby thcUnitedNationGseneralAssemblyforan
AdvisoryOpinionon whatthelegaconsequenceare
arisinfromthecomtnictionofthewnllbeingbuilby
IsraeltheoccupyinPower,intheOccupiedPalestinirn
Territory,includiinancaroundEastJerusalemas
describeilthcreportoftheSecretary-General,
considerintherulesandprinciplesofinternatiaw,
includintheFourthGenevaConventionof 1949,and
relevantSecurityCouncandGeneralAssembl Ryesolutions
WRITTEN STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY
THE GOVERNMEN TF TREREPUBLIC OFSOUTH AFRXCA
30JANUARY 2004
1. By decisiES-10/1 of8December2003theGrnerai ssemblrequested
onan urgenbasispursuantArticl96oftheCharterftheUniteNationsndin
accordance itGeneraissembl RyesolutiA/RES/ES-1 0/8D4ecembe2003,
anAdvisoryOpiniohm theInternatioCalurtfJustionthelegai
consequencesrisihm theconstructinftheSeparatin aibeinbuilby
Israe,heoccupyingoweri,ntheOccupiePaIestinTnenitor,ncludiinruid
aroundEasJenwlem, asdcscribdnthereportftheSecretary-Generai,
considerigherulesandprincipofnsternatioalwincludinheFourthGeneva
Conventioof1949,andrelevaSecwityCounciandGeneralAssembly
Resolutions. 2. Upon receivingthirequesttheCourtdecidethattheUnitedNationsandits
Membe rtatearelikeltobeabletofwnishinformatioonnthequestionsubmitted
totheCourt.Byits Orderof 19Decembe2 r003theCourftixcd30Januar y004 as
thetimelimitwithinwhichMiten statementsaybe submittedtotheCourti,n
accordancweithArticl66,paragaph2, oftheStatutoftheCourtT. hpresent
statemenwtilexamin teelegalconsequencearisinfromtheconstructioofthe
Separatiozlallonwhicha. AdvisoryOpinionisrequested.
3. Thecore issuinthiscaseisfortheCourtodeterminteheIegalityonotof
theSepamionWall.
4. TheSouth AfiicaGovernent feelitselfcompelletosubmitastatementto
theCourtonthisserioumattcrTheudoiding humanitariacatastrophnethc
ûccupiedPalestininerritorysofgraveconcerntotheGovernrnenotfSouth
AfricaasistheworseningsecwitysituatiinIsraei.Actions,suchasth'
constructinftheSeparation all,thatMer fuetlecycleofviolenceand
counter-violeceuststop.We areconvincedthatthesolutiforthe
Palestinidsraeconflictsanegotiatesettlementhawould resulinatwo-state
solution.Thatis,asovereigstateofIsraandasovereignstatofPalesîinewith
EastJedem asitscapitalH . owevert,h continuconstructionfa Sepamtion
Wallisa pretextooccupymore landanômakes anegotiatedeMernen evenharder
toachieveTheSeparatioWn ailwilIn~akehistwo-stasolutiototheIsraeli-
Palestiniconflicphysicallimpossibleoimplemena tndgraveltbreateany
prospectsorajustandpeacefûsledementand alastinpeace.The Separation all
isindeedundenninin tabilitithe MiddleEastandjeopardizinanyattemptto
reachapeacefusleüiernenftthislongandbitteconflict. Iï.FACTUAL BACKGROUND
5. TheSouthAfncan Governmen etdorseand accepttheexposofthefacts
ptrtaidntotheconstructioftheSepmtion WallintheOccupie dalestinim
Tenitory,ncludininandaroundEastJenisaleassetoutintheReporofthe
Secretary-GenepralparedursuanttoGeneralssemblyResolutioES-IO/3dated
24Novernbe 2003aswellastheReporotftheSpecial apporteofthe
CommissiononHuman Içightonthesituatiofhuman rightinthePalestinian
territorsccupiebyIsraesince1967,submitteinaccordancwithCommission
Resolutio19931A onthequestionoftheviolatiofhuman rightintheOccupied
ArabTerritorie,cludinPalestin.AES-10/24 8h)sstatementsbaseonthe
factpresenteinthabovementionR eeports,hicharealsobefortheCourt.
I /
I I
11
1 ' III JURlSPlCTION OFTHE COURT
Dc Courtha$JurisdicttogivethereauestcAdvisorOuinion
I
l
I 6. TheCourthasjurisdictinogivtheAdvisoryOpinionrequestedythe
1 Gend Asssnbly, asArticl65,paragraph1,otheStatutoftheInternatioCaorn
I ofJusticauthoriztheCourttogiveanAdvisoryOpinionatherequesofwhatever
I bodythatmaybeauthorisedomake sucharequest.UNGAis authorizedyArticle
11 96oftheClbarttomake sucharequest.
/i 7. TheUnitedNationGeneraAl ssanblyiitResolutioES-101 1ated8
/1 Decernbe2003inaccordancwe iArticl96of theChartcrrcqucsnthe
InternatioalurtofJusticpursimttoArticl65oftheStatutoftheCourt,o
!1
urgentlrendernAdvisoryOpiniononthefollawinquestion:
!
"Wha trethelegdconsequeneaesisifkom thconstructionthewall
beingbuiltbyIsraeheoccupyinPgower n theOccupiePalestinian
Territor,ncluàininandamund EastJerusaleasdescribedinthreporof
theSecretary-Ckneralnsideritgeruleand principlsfinternationalIl
1 ;
law2includintheFourthGenevaConventioonf1949,andrelevanSecuriîy
CouncilandGeneralAssemblyResolutions?"
8. TheSecretary-Gene mftheUniteNatio inhislettedate8December
2003,transmit&theResolutiototheCourt ,equestignAdvisoryOpinion.
1 I
Thereisnocom~ellingreasofortheCour todeclinto$ve anAdvisorvOpinion
/ 1
i l
TheCourhtason severaiccasinUstatethatalthougitspowa togive
/ 9.
AdvisoryOpinionusndeArticl65ofiisStatutisdiscretionaynlycompelling
1 !
i reasonswoddjustifrefusalfsucha requesItisoutcontentinhatthisrequest
1 presenttheCour tit hoswhreasons.
I , IV.STATEMENT OF LAW
I
/ ' General
I 10. Attheoutset,theGovernmenoftheRepublicfSouthAfn'cawishcststate
i clearthatthelegalconsequencosfthconstructinftheSepmtionWallbeing
l
I buildbyIsraelareinter-readndmmotbeconsidere dnisolatiofromone
1 1 anothw. ItisalsnottheintentioftheOovernmen ottheRepubli cfSouth
I l
1/ Afncato addresd legalconsequenctsatflowfiomtheille4 actiobyIsrael,
1! butonlytohighlighthemostserioulegaiconsequencrsesultifkomthebreiiches
';
11 ofintemationaiawthattheconstruc tftonSegaatioWaU prescrits.
1, h genera lndbefor&ddressinsgecificlcgalconsequeni,isour
convictiothaticonsideringhecasebeforittheCour t iinevitablhavetotake
intoaccounthefactthatheCourtisfaccwitha situatiwhereaMember Stateof
rheUnitedNatio hnsssystematicalverrnanyyearsrejectthedecisionand
ResolutionsftheCkneraAl ssemblandtheSecmïtyCouncil.Israhasa
deplorablrackrccordofsystematicaryfûsintocomplywiththeResolutionsf
th2Genera lssembIyandtheSecurity okl relatigoitLtlegdactionapinst
Palestine.Suchconductcreatanirrefutaimpressiothatthereia seriolack
ofgood taithonthparofthatStateThe obligatitoactingoodt"ditb,eiag
i gened principlefIawisdso partofintemationlw (CertaiNorwegianLoans,
1 JudgementI,CJReports1957,p53).Thelackofadherencteotbîprinciplof
internationaw shoddinitselfhavelepl consequenceItiourcontentiothatthis
lackofadherencteoUnitedNationResolutionsnddecisions,onstitutsserious
disregarfor,andisinfacinconflicwitbthelegalobligatitoactinmd faitin
accordanc eiththeprinciplofInternationawl .IthisregarthewordsofJudge
LauterpachitthecasoenVotin ProcedwesonQamtiolisrelatintoReportsand
PetitionconcerningheTerritorofSouthWes tpica,arepertinentndtheCourt
maywish totakenotethereowhereheaddressetdhequestioofnon-adherentce
recommendatioo nstheUniteNations.Thesecomment areevenmorepertinent
when icornestoUnitedNatio Rnssolutiowshm he statetha..."indoinsoit
[suc hsuiteactsaitsperilwhenapointisreachewhen thecumulativeffectof
thepersistedisregarofthearticulaepiniooftheOrghtion issuchasto
fostteheoonvictiothatteStaitequesti haonbecornguiltyofdisloyaltothe
PrinciplesndPurposesftheCharter.T"hejudgethcncontinuethatsuchastate
"whichconsistentsetitselabovethesolemnland repeatedyxpressed
judgcmentof theOrghtion, inparticulainproportioasthatjudgement
approximatetsowaaimity, ay&d thatilbasoversteppdhcimperceptiblene
between improprietyndillegali, etweediscrétiandarbitminess,etweenthe
exercisofthelegalrighttdisregarherecomrnendati aondtheabuseofthatridit,
and thaithasexpos tseltotheconsequence egitimatelollowingasalegal
sanction(VotingProcedureonQuestiomrelatingtoReportsandPetilions
concerningtheTerritoofSouthWestAfLicaA,dviso~OpinionICJ Report1955,p
67atp 120).Thesewords arcevenmorerelevantntightofthefactthattas of
Articl25 oftheCharterftheUnitedNatio theSecuritCouncilhasthepower to
tàkebindingdecision, hichMmber Stateareunderalegalobligatitooky.
(Articl25oftheChart efrheUniteNationsof1945;Malanczuk P.Akehurst's
ModernIntroductiotuIntermtionaklm, 1989p 374).Israehasconsistmtlyeeii
inviolatioofîhibasicidternationelgalobligatandduty. Itisagiiinthis
backgrounthatsorneofthelegalconsequencearisihm theconstructinfthe
SeparatioWallwilInow beaddresseci. 11lee;aoftheSrnaration all:defactomexatioofpartofthePalestine
OccuvidTerrîtori. cludiEastJerusalem
12. ItisanundisputeactthattheconstructoftheSeparatioWallinthe
OccupiePalestininerritori,ncludiinandaroundEasJerusalemc,earlandin
some instancsubstantiaiy,partfromtheArmisticeineof 1949,thso-called
Gree nineT.heSeparat iolnonitscurrentndprojecteroute,incorporates
substantiareasoftheOccupiePalestininerritore,speciatheWestBankand
EastJerusaiem,toIsraeterritor.urthemoret,econstructiom involvethe
contiscatinnddestructionfPalestinlandandresourcesndhasadevastating
influenconthelivesofthousansfcivilia(anaspecwhichwillbedealtwith
separateynthistatement)Thesefactsarecanhed bytheReportofthe
Secretary-GeneprlepardursuanttoGeneraAssembl y esolutiES-10/13
(AIES 0/148dated3December 2003)a,wellastheReporoftheSpeciai
RapporteurftheCommissiononHurna nightsonthesituatiohfumanri@& in
thePalestintdtones occupiedsince1967andsubmittenaccordancweiththe
Hwnan RightCommissi Ronsoluti1993/1/ACE/CN.4/2004 /ated8September
2003).
13. TheconstnictiooftheSeparation d isclearillegai.Itdonotonly
violatSecuritCounciRl esolut242 of 1967resultfromthe1967war,butalso
numerouo stheSecuritCounciResolutionsnwhichiwasdeterrnînethaa11
rneasuresakenbylsraetochang ehphysical harac temr,graphicomposition,
institutiosûucturorstatuofthePalestininccupieàerritoiesi,ncluding
Jerusaleorauy partthereohavenole@ validit(SecuriCounciResolutio464
(1980)aswelias478(1980),298(1971)271(1969 26,(1969)-252(1968and237
(1967)) T.heSecuritCoumilhasals oecidec,ithspecificrefertoce
Jemalem,thatal1legislatandadministrativetiotakenbyIsraeltchangethe
statmoftheCityofJenisalei, cludigxpropriatioflanand propertis,ansfer
ofpopulationsndlegislaiaimedattheincorporatinfthéoccupiesectionare
totdlinvali(SecurityouncRilesolirtn98 ,1917))Also,asifinarefdn, the
SecuritCowcilhascalledonmanyoccasio forthccessatiand reversif al1
actwhich havercsultintheaggravationfthsituatiandwhichhavenegatively
influencehepaGeprocessw, hictheconstructinfthSeparation alcleatly does.'ïheconstructioftheSeparationWalliclearlyinbreachoftheseSecurity
CouncilResolutionandthereforillegalitermsofinternationl aw(Seealso
paragrap1above).
14. IntermsoftheUnitedNationsChartera,wellascustomaryinternationallaw,
theuseofforcein internationalrelatagainsttheterritorialintegrityorpolitical
independenceofany statisillegalTthusfoliowsaforror+thaan aggressomot
acquireterritorybyannexatiortheacquisitioofterritoyyforce.(Articl2(4)of
theCharterofthe L'nitd ationsMdancnik, P.Akehurst's odernIntrohctionto
InternationLlm, 1989,p 152)Furthermor eternationlaw doesnotrecognize
theuseofself-defmcetosettldisputesrelatitoterritor, hichinthepresecase,
seems tobethemotivatioused tojustithe illegaiconstructofthe Separation
Wall. Article2(3oftheUnitedNationsCharterrequiresmemberstatetoscttle
theirdisputesbpeacefurmeansand thisobligationsappliemuch toterritorial
disputeastoanyother clasofdisputes(Malanczu k,Akehwst'sModern
Introductioo InternationLaw,1989,p 314).
15. Tht GeneraAl ssemblResolutioontheDeclmtiononPrinciplesof
InternationLaw concernhgFriendlRyelationandCo-operaa tioongStatein
accordancwiththeCharteroftheUnitedNationsemphasisedthelegalprincipthat
everyStathasthedut o refraiinitsintemationrllationsf'rthethreaoruse
of forceagainsttheterritorialintegityorpollndependencofany State,oin
any othermer inconsistewtiththepuposesof lhUnit Nedtions.Suchaihreat
oruseofforceconstitutesaviolationofintematiollwandtheCharterof the
UnitedNation (Gseneral ssemblyResolution262(XXV) ontheDeclaratioon
PrincipleofInternationLaw concerningFriendlRelationsandCo-operation
arnongStatesinaccordancwiththeCharteroftheUnitedNationsdated24 October
1970).
16. Furthermore, everytathasthedutytorefrzlfromthethreatoruseofforce
to_violatnternationlinesofdemarcatiosn.&as armistich, establishbyor
pursuanttoaninternationagreemen owhichitisaparty orwbich iisothem4se
boundto respecNo acquisitiobvmther Stateresulthhm thethreatoruseof
forceshalberecophxi asle4 (ownemphasis)(-General ssemblyResolution 2625(XXV) ontheDeclaratioonPrimipleofInternationLlawconcerning
FriendlRelatioand ationamongStatesi=cordancewith thCharterof
thUnitedNations
17. The constructinftheSepamtio n alduetoitsprohibitieostand
permanen strruchielature,onstitueothinlessthantheunilaterielimitation
by IsraeotheboundarbyetweentheSW ofIsraeand theStatofPalestine.
Whereve trhiboundardyeviatfromtheGree ninew,hicpresentlrepresenthe
ad bomdary betweenIsrael ndPalestithedefactomnsequenceisthatthat
areawilbeannexed andincorpuratwdithithterritoyf Esai.SecuritCouncil
Resolutio242of 1967alsounderlintheprincipoftheinadmissibiliyfthe
acquisitinftemtorybymeansofforceand instructthathestufuquowith
regartotheterritoriltegrioftheareainvolvedmustberestoreàAIso,andas
aireadindicateaboveinterrnoftheDedaratioreferretoabove everySme has
thedutytorefrahm thekat oruseof forctoviolattheexistinginternational
linesodemarcatiosuchasarmisticIinewhetheerstablishdutsuantoan
agreemenotrwhichiisotherwisboundtorespe asameansofsolvingterritorid
disputeandproblmisconcerninhntiers oStateIsraclcarlyactswithogood
faitandincontraventiofitinternatli awnobligatiosyconstnictinthe
SepmatioWn all.
18. Israemain& that theGreen Linewasnotconfïrmdasan international
Boundar yndthatbisia mattetiti1benegotiateby t.Parties.ius,there
seems tobetheviewthattherewiI1bmm for''tenitoadjustrnentnecessitated
by "secuiîconsideratiommGerso Iruei,thWes BfankandInternationlaw,
1978,p76);McHugo, JRmolution242:Ale@ reappraio sflerighr-winIuaeli
iruerpretatinthewirMi.maIphrar weithrejèreneotheconflctbeîweenIsrcrfl
andthePalefinians,002,InternatioaniComparativ eawQuarterlyvol.51,
p 851onp 860). Scholmwhosuppor thiview f'urtergueîhaî"(1astatewhich
hasbeenvictimofattacmay berecognizedshavingalegitimaclaimtoborder
adjustmentsnpunds ofmilitarysecurit;and] (2)thSec* Councilwould,
inthicase,approvofbordtrmodificatiosotheextendmmed necessaryfor
securîtyE.venthesscholarsastetoaâd howevert,at"suchchan&;esuldnotbe
enforceby thstatw hoseclaimiadmittedb,uwuldonlybe effecteinthe contactofafkelynegotiatesettlement,ndonlytoIheextencompatibl eîthajust
andlastingpeace.(Korman ,heRighiofConqucos tcquisitioofTerritorby
ForceinInlernationalawandPructice,1996,pp211 -212;MeHugo ,.Resolutiun
142:A legalreappraisoflhreigkt-winIsraeliinterpretatof thwithdrawal
phrasewithrefrencetotheconflctberneeImel anddhePalestinian2,002,
Intemation aidComparativ LawQuarterly v, l.51,861).
19. Iseems thattheconstructinfth eeparation dlintheOccupied
Territoryincludininandmund EastJenisalemr,eiîesonthepossibilthatthe
SecurityCounciwiilinal1probabiliapp,mvoefbordermodificationotheextent
deemed necessarforsecuritifsuchmodificationillbecompatible ithajustand
lasridpeace.Thisassumptionisal%inlinewiththeinterpretatanparentlyiven
toResolutio2n42(1967)byIsraelsfatasthephrase"secureandrecognized
boundarie s"concmedasitappearisnsub-paragap(h ii)ofparagaph1ofthatsaid
Resolutiowhichstatesasfollows:
"(ii)Terminationfatdlaimsorstateofbeiligerencyndrespectforand
acknowledgemen otthesovereigntyt,mtoridintegriandpoliticaindepenbce
. .
ofeveryStateintheareand theirrigtoliveinpeaceynthinseureandrecopized
boudariesfke fiomthreatorforce."ForImaelboudafieswillonlybe securif
thesecuritconcernsofIsraelregardlesosf thosofPalestine,remet.Given the
increasinxpansioonfiilegalsettlemeit,is notbeiîcthattheconstructiofthe
Separation allrepremtsalegitimateecurimeasure butratheranunlawfu lcof
territoramexationunder the guiseof a securitymeasure. Furthemore, the
acceleratinftheconstructinftheSeparatioWn aias weU astheexpansi oftnhe
illegalsettlemmtsnPalestiniaand,isanactofannexatiotnhatiinconsistewtiüi
theobligatioosflsraundertheintedonally accepteRoad Mapof theQuartet.
20. The presencaseisaisoaclassicexamplwhere seriousiscrepmcietxist
bctweenthecleatlyreçognisenternationlalwviolatiosncthefact osth.e
ground.The internationalmmunitydl be&ced witha defactosituatiwhich
willbeverydifficutochange .tisourcmtentionthattheconstructiofthe
SeparatioWall iillegai,anregardles idewhich pf~texitibeingwnstnicted,
thepracticalonsequenceftheexistinandplannedSeprationWallisthatitis
beingaectedinPdestinianOccupie derritorncludininand aroundEast Jemalem. Thi action,althougille@ intr:m ofintemationallw,hafore
i
representthedefact trnaexatioofpartsofthattenitoiy. Thismusbeviewedas
oneofthemostseriouscoquences oftheconstruction oftheSeparationWall.
I
Itis~urcontentionthatanydelimitatiooftheboundarie sut be negotiated
21.
betweenthetwo stafeon thebais ofequaiitofboth Stateandnotastheprescnt
1 situatiowhertPalestinwillbeconfiontedwith afait-a-cornintheformof the
SeparatioWd. The partieshouldbeon an equaIfmhg andeachshouldrespect
theentitlcmenoftheothermderinternationalaw. Thiswillbealmostimpossiblein
asituatiowherea SeparatioWal lfhundredo sfkilometerhavebeenconstructed
andiskeptininthtugh theuseofforce.
22. Thus,afurt honrequenceoftheconstructioofthe SeparatioWall wilbe
thereversaol fthenomiaprocessofthepracticaalspectofthedemarcatioof
boundariewshichBmde gptlydescribeasfollows;"Agreements astatheprecise
detailofaftontierenshrineidnawritteninstrument,soh followedbythe
separateprocedmofdemarcatiotn h,atithemarking l,iteraofythefiontieronthe
ground bymeaasof posts,StonepilIars,ndthelike.A hntier may belegally
dehitive,forsome purposes,andyetre& undernard. Frontierwhichare "de
facto",eithbecaus oetheabsenceofdemarcatioo rbecauseof thepresenceofan
unsettledterritorial die ayncverthelesbeacceptedasthelegallimitof
sovereigntforsome purposesf,orexampletboseofcivil ocriminalurisdiction,
nationalitaw,andtheprohibition ounpemiitteintrusionwithorwithouttheuseof
amis"(Bmwniie 1.Princip2eq PublicInternationulaw, 1998 , 122).Inthe:
I presentinstancetheboundaryillhavebeendemarcated bymeansoftheSeparation
I Waiibeforetheactua iegotiationbetweenthepartiecouldtakeplaceand dl
1 prejudice yborderdemarcationnegotiationtoan untenableextent.Theunilateral
I demarcat oifteboundaryisclearlyinconflicwiththeprovisionosfthe
l Declaratiosetoutabove ,llegalandinconfiictwiththementioneSecuriîCouncil
i
i Resolutionand withtheprinciplcotheself-determinatinfpeoples.
i ThesilfdeteminatioofthePaiestiniPde
1,
! 23. TheReportoftheSpecialapporteuortheCommissio nnHuman Rights,
onfitsituatiofhuman rightinthePalestinterritorosccripibyIsraelsince
1967,submitten accordamwe ithCommissionemlution19931A2
(E/CN,4/ï004/6,Septembe2r003)concludthatthWall violattwoofthemost
fhdamentapl rincipsfconternporaiyternatiolaw,nameIytheprohibitinn
i
1 . theforcibacquisio tftonritoyndtherightoselfdetemination.
I
24. Therightb self-dttmnimtionndtheconceptftemitorareintrbically
linkeThe rightoselfdeterminatfindsitrootsintheCharts,pecincaArzicle
l(2andArticl55,andisconfmned bycornmoAnrticl1oftheInternational
Covenan on CiviandPoliticl ightandîheInternatioalvenanotnEconomic,
Socid md CiilturRîghts.thasfurîhermoren coniïrmednnumerous
ResolutionsftheUniteNationsm,ostnotablGeneraAlssembfy esoluti1514
1 (XV) onthehrlsiation otheGrantingfIndependcn ceColonidCorntriesand
1 PeoplesandGenexsAilssemblResoluti2625 ontheDeclaratioon
1 PrincipiesInternationalw Concerningriandly elatiasndCoaperation
among StateinAccordancweittheCharteorftheUniteNations.
25. Asa basiprincipofintemationalnr,ihasbeenattributdiththstatus
ofiuscagens(MalancnikP.Abhurst'sModern1nh.oductitnInternatiomlaw,
1997,p327),whiletheinternatialourofJustic(ICJdescribesllf-
determinatiasanobligationrgaomnes(EastTimorCase(PortugalAwtralia)
ICJReports1995p 90).
I
I I
1 26. TherighofthePalestiniaasapeopletoself-determinasnio
unquestionabaedhasbeenwnfimed byGeneraA l ssembResolutio3236
1
, 0 of22 November1974whichprovidesfm:
'YheinalienabeightofthPalestinipneoplincluding:
(a)therightoself-detemidionwithouextemainterference;
(b)therightonationailndependeaendsovereignty". Y...%Y"-,.A*--4 II\"tI
-r
27. The nghtofthePlestinianpeopletoself-determinatobe attainOnthe
basisofterritorl vereignwyithitheboundarieofan independenPtalestinian
statehasbee n dlirmedbytheUnitedNationsonnurnerou osccasioandforms
theundedyingprincipofthetwo-statsolution.
i
Iissubmittedaswas alsodeterniindytheReportoftheSpecial
28.
RapporteuoftheCommission onHuman Rights,onthsituatioonhuman rightin
l thePaiestiniacmtoricsoccupiedbyIsraesince1967 hattheSeparation d is
intendetocreattf:ionthe ground thasalread yeensubmitted hatte
construct oitheWalI,evm intheabsenceofaformaaictofannexatioas wasthe
casewiththeillegdannexatioofEastJemalem byIsrael,nothhgbut desfacto
annexation.Theillegaiiofthiactionpersehasaisoalreadbeenargued.
Howevert,helinkagebetweenterritor,nshrinen theprin~ipehatajustand
1astinsolutiototheIsnieli-Palestisiuation usptrovidfortwoStatewithin
secureandrecognisedordersa,ndthnghtto PalestinineIf-cietminatihavethe
resulthathes anncxationctionaisoviolatetherightofself-determinanh.e
SpecialRapporteurointsout:''peoplcan onlycxercistherightoself-
deteminationwithinWtory. TheamputatioonfPalestininerritoseriously
interfers itthenghtofself-determinatofnthePalestinineopleasit
substantialeducesthesizoftheself-detdon unit(alreadl) within
whichthatrighistobeexercised"aragraph15).
29. 'ThReportoftheSecretary-Generpreparepdursuano GeneraAl ssembly
ResolutioES- 113 (AIES-01248dated3Decembe 2003)starklpointsoutthis
resulbasedonthemuteoftheofficiamap,approximate ly5squarekilometres,
16,69oftheentirWest Ba&, willbeenclosebythe Wall,anareainwhich
237 000PaiestinianiveThi attempattdefa anntxatioofasubstantiplartof
theself-determinatoenitoryofthePaiestinhs,iscleaviolatiooftherighof
thePalestinipneopletoselfdetemination.
Excessive,dis~rowrtionaandilie~use oftheconcepofsçlfdefencebvIsrael
i 30. Itiscommon causethatheUnitedNationsChuterinArticl2(4)outlawsthe
1
1 byirreguirorcescm beinterprd as anked attacjustifyhacl& ofself-
defcnce,theICJfounintheNicaraguacase(ICJReports1986(Merits14)thatacts
by"armed bands,gtoupsirregularsrmercenariewshichcarryoutactof amed
forcemay munt toarmed attacprovidedthatiisofsucha gravitythit
amounts toanactu maed a#ackby regularorcesandthasuch forcesmusbesent
by oractonbefialofastate.Thisis nthecaseinthePalestinc~nfiict.
34. Wideinterpretatioosthe"inherentrighttoself-defehas dsogivenbirth
, tothecontroversiloctrinof anticipatyelfdefence,otablyadvanceby Israel
withregardtoitattacontheOsirak nuclearfacilinIra n1981 (whichwas
condernnedbytheGeneraAl ssemblasa premedibteadndunprecedenteactof
aggressioînGd AssemblyResolutio36/27).Thi soctrineis,inpracto,dy
invokedbystateasa lastresortandisconsequentarelused asajustificatfor
theuseofforce.Thelwk ofconsistestatpracticandtheclew andunqualified
oppositiotheretexpresseby Membe rtateintheGenera lssemblynegatesany
attemptojustifythisdoctrascustomaryinternationailaw.
35. Ihm oftenbeenmgued thatanotherxceptiototheCharter'prohibition
theuse offorceiarighttouseke inprotectionofnatiods, ofwhichtheoriginis
acustomarr yightpredatitheCharter. swever, hrightpresupposesorcible
interventiinanotherstatwiththeaimof prokctinorresçuingnationaand
thereforeoesnotfWi applicatiinthepmentcase.
36. Al1statesgreethatheancientlegalprincipofnecessitand
proportionalifoms partofandhavesinc teetirnesofthjuswardoctrine,
formedpartofthecoreofthedoctrinofself-defence (GrC,.Internatonl aw
andthe UseofForce,2000,p105),andhav e sobee nnaiysedbytheICJinthe
NicaraguacaseandtheAdvisoryOpinionontheLegalitoftheThrea ot Useof
NuclearWeupons T.heessentilharacterisiftheseprinciplsasbeendefinedas
follows:self-defmmustnotbe retaliatorpunitive;heaimshouldbetohaltand
repelanattacandaredependentonthefâctsoa particulcaseWithregardtothe
premt case,heconstructionoftheSeparatiWallbyIsraeandtheconsequences
thereofforthePalestinnivilipopulatiosuchasthesevm restrictofn
movement ,heisolationofcivilihm theizfannld, thedestructiofcrops,the impairmenotaccesstojobsandessentisocialservicesasdescribnctheReportof
theSecretary-GeneaireparepursrnttoGeaeralAsscmblyRemlutionES-10/13
(AIES -On48dated3Decembe2 r003)am totdlydisproportionendunnecessary
bearininmind thathefocusofIsraelidefenagainstttacikoccasionaiand
ir~egulrttacksyloneopaators.
37. The SeparatioWall ,shasbeenaryed alsoresdtsinthedefmo
annexationopart ofOccupiedPaleshianTerritorThe illegalofthisaction,and
itsunnecessa ryddisproportionneaturisclearfromtwoprecedents'Necessity
and proportionalyrealscrucialitherejectionbstateofprolongedoccupation
oftaritoryithename ofself-defenc.husIsraep resenceinSoutherLebanon
fiom1978to2000 and SouthATrica'sccupatioofabufferzoneinAngolahm
1981to 1988werebothclaimedtobejustifiedasself-defandboth repeatedly
anduniversallyondemnedasnotnecessarorproportionatselfkiefenc(GrayC.
Iizternatioalw dd theUse ofForce2200 p0,08)The SecuritCouncilcdledon
bothIsraelndSouthAfncato withdrawinrespectiveSccuritCounciRl esblutions
425and545.
38. Somecommentator have,withinthecontextoftheprinciplesofnecesandy
proportionaiattcmptedtoadvanceaso-called"accumulatofneventsor"pin-
pricktheorofmed attackThi sdone incaseswh asthepresentinordeto
justifianotherwisdisproportioneesponstoa seriofattacks.I1ssubrnitted,
howevert,hatthitseorydoesnotenjoyanywidespreadupporteitherinthepractice
orin theopiniiuriofstates.lso,necessityandproportion=main to be
assessedonthebasiofthefactsofthespe~ifcaseandasindicated,nthiscasthe
impactoftheco~on oftheSeparatioWallremallisutofal1proportion its
objective,afactorthatcmot bediscowtbymeans oftheinvocato ftnhiseory.
39. Fmm theaboveitfoIlowsthatthecomctionoftheSepartitiWall by
Israecanno tejustifionthebais oftherightoself-defeneontainainArticle
51 oftheCharteAr.rti5l1isnotapplicabinthepresent ueforthefbllowing
reasons: thesuicidbomb attackperpetrateagakitIsraeibyIonePalestinian
suicidbombers ,houghreprehensibandcausingthedeathof many
innocentiviliandonotmeet thethresholsebyintanationallawto
bedefinedasarmedattacksustiqina respnseintennsofth eight
toself-defencontaineinArticl51;
ArticlSIdefinestherightoseffdefenceaatemporaryright,tbe
extinguishodncetheSecuritCouncihastakenappropriate
meamm.DespiteIsraeliassurancetsaitisatemporarysecurity
meam, tbefactson thegroumia,containedintheReporof the
Secretary-ûeneraleparedursuantoGend Assembly Resolution
ES-10/ 13dthevay permanencoeftheSeparation alsuggesthe
opposite.Moreove,tisnotameasurethatisconnecteinanyway to
SfxuritCouncilctionandisbeingerecteincontraventionfa
clcardemand bytheUnitedNatio forIsraeltostopandreversthe
constructionfthewalintheOccupiedPalestiniaTemtory"(GA
ResolutioES- 0/13);
l ù1any caseustificatiofthismeasmeon thebasisoftherigto
selfdefenccontainednArticl5 1isinappropriaue, undand
1
bad uponthewrong assumptionT.hrighttoself-defenis
I triggerebyan armedattacandconsequentl"impliemort to
cornter-forcicornesinmction totheuseofforcebyîheother
party"(Dinstei,.War dggre$sionandSeFdefence.2001,
p 167)Despittheunacceptab latuo reactio takenin
comtmctintgheSeparation allliktherequisitionogflanand
thenegativhummithan andsocio-economiimpactiwilihaveon
I
thePaiestinian,econstructioftheSeparation aldoesnot
amounttotheuseofcomter-forcerenderingnyattemp ojuw it
onthebis of seifdefencintermsofArticl51,inapplicable.
40. Asregardstheargument~atîheconsûuctiooftheSepmtion Wallisbeing
l
1 justiriebySecuritCounci lesolution1368(2001)and1373 (2001),adopted withithecontexotftheattackof1Z Septembe x001ontheterritoryftheUnited
StatesoAmerica ,tissubmittethattheconstructinftheSeparatioWallby
Israegoesfarbeyondwht was contemplatebytheseResolutions.
41. TheseResolutions, generalermsinthepreambless,tathatanyactof
internationtirrorisistobere&arde asathreatointernationpalaceandsecurity.
Resolution1373 ,dopteunder ChapteVrn oftheCharter, enprovideinthe
operativearagraph istedia adecisiothatMembeS rtatesMltakethenecessary
stepstopreventhecommissi oferroristct(puagrah2(b)).
42. Itissubrnitteh,owever,hatheseprovisionsrecouchedintoogeneral
termstojdfy aspecifiactiiketheconstructinftheSeparation all,whicper
seviolatesprinciplsfinternationalwInthisregaritmustbe pointeoutthatthe
provisioauthorisingemk Statetotakethenecessarytepstopreventhe
commissionofterroriactsipartofanumber ofspeciflah-terrorist easures,
one(paragrap2 (g)whichspecificallyimsatrestrainithemovemeno tfterrorists
orterror giusts"Preven tt ernovemen0ttemrîstsortemristgroupsbyeffective
bordecontrolandcontrolosnissuanceofidentipapersandtraveldocument .s..
Itisnotconceivabto intmprehegenerapl rovisicontaineilparagrap2h(b)as
usurpinthesespecificeasure ormovemeat controtftenonstsandtemrist
groupsandjustiQamcamrc whichWU,asmadeclear intheReporotftheSecretary-
GeneraI reparepursuantoGeneraAl ssembiyResolutioES-10/13(GIE S0/248
dated3 Decembe2 r003,seriousimpairthemovmentofinnocent civilianswell
astheiraccesto fardand,workplaceand essentilociaservices. hisderogates
fiom thegeneralegalprincipeeneralibuspeciulobuson derugat.
43. Notwithstandi nherighof hraeltoprotecittscitizagainsattackand
theseriouconcernforthepreventionftmrist attackstemationallyi,shoulbe
notedthatthephilosophyehindtheinternationightagainsterroris=mains that
thisshoulbe donewithintheboundarieosfinternatioalw.ForexarnpiAerticle
19 ofthewidelyratifiInternationaolnventioortheSuppressioonfTerrorist
Bombings stateW: %othbg inthiConventiosnhal&ct otfierights,
obligationsndresponsibilitesStateandindividuauisndeinternationallaw..". 44, Itistherefieubrnittea,lsowiththecontexoftheotherargumentrsaised,
thattheperd provisionsfthetwoSecuritCouncilResolutionsshouldbereas
subordhat o itspecifiprovision,specialparapph 2(g)ofResolutio1373
andthatnothinintheseResolutioesxcludes hepplicabilyfinternatiolaw to
theOccupiedPalestininerritorincludinn andaroundEastJerusaleor
authonseasctiosncontraventionfinternatiollw.
HumanitariaLnaw
45. Iistritlawthainternationalmanitarilawappliesfmmthe
commencemen otfmyconflic, hicinthecaseofthePalestini/Isracliconflict,
fin&applicabilsincethe1967war,untiagenerdpeaceagreemenht asbeen
reachedT. hercfonithecaseoftheOccupiePalestinianerritor,rael, sthe
OccupyingPower, ibound tooomplywiththeHagueRegdationsof 1907andthe
FourthGeneva ConventiorelatitotheProtectioofCiviliaPersaninTime of
Warof 1949,whichtogether stabl thchgalregimeofbelligeretccupation.
1
i TheseConvention asracceptetobecustomariynternatiolaw andarethus
i bindingonal1stateincludhgheI, whois aHi&Contractin Partyofthefour
CicnevaConventionof1949.Acwrding toArticle27oftheViennConventionon
theLaw ofTrestieof 1%9,apartymaynot invoktheprovisionofitsinternaw
asjustiticatforitsfailutoperforitsobligatiounderatreatyIa nnv lawor
1
1 modificatimnaristinlawisneededtocany outtheobligatiomposcd bya
treatthestatconcemecsihouldenmrethathisisdanebythetim ehetrea tyters
(
intoforcIn intemationllwîherefora,statcannotleadthatitiwaitinforits
parliameno legislaT.hiineffectmeanthattheIsraei overment'sargument
thaaithoughitharatifitheFourGencva Conventionithasnotyetincorporated
themintodomestilegislatiandthercfm inotbound toenforcthem ,sinlight
oftheprovisioofthe1969 ConventioontheLawof Treaties,hicharecustomary
internationalwétnhemfobrîndingalstatew,ithoule@ basis.
46. Article47 to78oftheFourthGenevaConventioonf 1949whic hre
specialdevotedtooccupiedterritor,reapplicabenthicase.Oneofthe
fundamentarlulisseforthinArtic47of theFod Geneva Conventionunder
whichtheri@ of perso~wivininoccupiedterritoasrfullyprotectby internationalwThe OccupyinPgowm,inthiscaseIsrril, aynotalttheilegal
situatiby eitheraunilatelcorannexatioonfthctenitorfortheyremah
protectedersons.
47. TheSeparation allthabasbeenandcontinuetobebuiltbythe
Governent ofIsraew,hichrtsuiinthedefactoincorporatiofthepartsofthe
OccupiedPaiestinincrritor,ncludinn andaroundEastJerusaleintoIsraeis
indireccontraventinfArticl47oftheFourthGenevaConventionand dso
violatevariouUniteNationsResolutionslludetobeforthatcalledfothe
withdrawa ifIsraearmedforceshm theOccupitdPalesthiaTerritory.
48. TheSeparatio n alasdescribeindetd inthereportoftheSpecial
Rapporteu rftheCommissi onHuman Righton thsituatioofhurnanrightsin
theOccupiedPalestininaritorie(E/CN.4/2004/6),asresultinvast
expropriatioflandandhasdestroye domess,hops,schools,waternetwosknd
agricuItd landbelongintothePaIestiniashwe actareexpresslprohibiteby
Articl53oftheFourthGenevaConventionwhichStatethat"anydestructibythe
1 OccupyingPowerofrealorpersonalropertbelonginindividdy orcollectively
!
toprivatpris, ortotheStateortoothcpublicauthoritis,tosociaor
cooperatiorganizations,prohibite,xcepwheresuchdestructiosrendered
1
absolutenecessaybymilitaroptionsn.
1
49. Thejustificatinutfor*bytheGovemmen tfIsraforsucha
contraventinftheaforementionAdrticle539ntheconstructinftheSeparation
Wallitself,isthatthepurpsseoftheSeparntalliforthesecuritofIsraand
suchdestructionrseinurofPalestinhpropertisdemandebdythenecessitiosf
war,aspermittebiyArticl23oftheHague Regdationof 1907.Imustbe made
clearthrtheconcep of"militayecessitydoesnotreleaaestatfiomthe
obligatioosfcomplyinwgithintemationalmanitariaaw.The Cimeva
ConventionasndAdditionaProtocolsavealreadytructhebalancbetweenthe
demandm s adon th aw oftheconduc tfwarandtherequiremen tfhumanity.
50. Inviewoftheaforernentionea,umberoffactoron thegrounshouldbe
considereinordertoevaluatntermsofintemationallw,intemationai humanilari aw andinternatioaiman:righltwofthejustificatn adby the
IsmeIiGovernmenftotheiracti~ns,namely:
(a TheconstructinftheSeparatiWallwitbînPalesthianterriyncluàing
i
l inandmund EastJerusalisindimt codict withinternatiaw that
providethatthtemtormaynot beannexe idanywar,includiawarof
I
1 self-defence;
l
l
I (b) TheSeparational ncorporatmsostotheillegalIsrae1siettie, hich
stillfom thesubjt attofnegotiatiosetweeIsraeandPalestinei,nto
thIsraelide.TheseIsrasettlemenareiilegdnoonlbecausethey
qresent anattertt acquiterritobyforcebutdso becauie
contravenesrtic49 oftheFourtGenevaConventiownhic-tes clearly
thatth"Occupyin gowerdudlnotdeportrtransfpartositsowncivilian
l
l populatiointotheterrittoccupies";
1 (c) nie SeparatiWall,accorditothereporoftheSpaid Rapporte ofrhe
i ConunissioonHuman Rightsonthesituatiofhumanrightinthe
i
CkcupiedPalestbiianTerrit(sEICN.4/2004/andtheRcport the
Secretary-Genepalparedursuantoherd Assembly ResolutioES-
I
30/13(AIES10048dated3 December2003)h,sresultinclosedareas
i whereapemit systmforPalestinilisviandior orkinintheareis
I operatiandcreatesenclavwherePaiestininillagesacutoffhm
i basicservicsuchashedthservic echoolwaterresourcandelectricity
1 network amongsothers. iesinhumam conditi oratedbythe
constructinftheSeparatin alareforcisome PalestinisoIeave
I theihomesintheaffoctareaand therebmathg agenerationf
I
1 internayispiacepersons. hwnstquenceosthmSeparation alinthis
i instanmcusbejudgedbasedontheprincipofproportionalys
recognibzyenternational maNtah lawThisalsoconstiruhsuman
! rightsvioiatshatmustbejudgedagaintheInternatioalvenanotn
l
CivilandPoliticalRightsthInternat ioonnlanonSocia lconornic
I andCulturRiighbothofwhichIsraelassigned;
1
l (d) TherehavebeenvariouUnitedNationsResoiutiocondemnint he
annexatioofEas terusalem,swelasthosethacd1fortherctuo rnits
statbeforeitoccupationE.astJerusalconsequentlisanoccupied
regiona,nareawhereinternatioal manitanalnwmust apply.
51. Itisanestablishedrincipefintemationllwthattheconductofthe
militaadministratiinonlyoccupieareaincludingheOccupiedPdestinian
Temtory includininandBK)& EastJedem isto bejudgedby thstandardosf
internationalw.Securitmemure s ustbetakeninaccordanceithinternational
humanitariainw,andtheymustdlowforaquickreturntonorma civilialife.nie
permanennt atuoftheSeparation anegatesaithedoresaid.
52. The righoftheIsraeGovanmen o taksec* precautionsnotdisputed.
However t,hisightisnotexerciinavacuum.There aredes, principiand
limitatiosccordeclyintemationaumai~itarianwasoutliaeabove,onhow and
towhatextentthisnghtcaandmust beexercised.
53. Theonginsofmodern intemationauman rightlawaretobefoundinthe
Ch- oftheUnitedNationsOne ofthepurposeosftheUnitedNationas
expresscinArticlel(3)otheChartei,topromoteandencoura rgpectfor
humm rightandfwidamenta flieedomfoallwithoudistinctiastoracesex,
IanguagorreligioThi themeisalsotakeup inArticles13,5and56,Article
55(cprovidethattheUniteNationsshalpromotueniversalespecforand
observancoef,humannghtsandfimimentalfieedms forall,whiIArticl56
obligesMember Statetotakeactiotoachievthesepurpases.
54. Thefirstinternationlstrumett codiffundamenthaulmanrightwasthe
UniversaDl eclmuticfHm Rightof1948,anddespitbeinga&solutionof
theGend AsscmbIy andofwrnmendatory natur te,rightenshrinehereinare
now acceptealcustomaryinternationalwwhilesomehavealsoobtainethe
statuofiuscogen soms ofintemationiaw (DugardJ,.Interwtionlaw:A South
ApicanPerspectiv2,000p 241)Theeffecthereofsthattheprovisiobindaiî StatesTreaîyeffm basalsbeen givetothe Universaleclamtionnthe
InternationClovenantnCivilad PoliticRights(ICCPR )ndtheInternational
Covenan tn EconomicS,ocialandCulturaltigh(ICESCR B)esidesobtainiag
universaclharade,umanrigha tsealsnow acceptetlbe"inaliembleand
inviolabrightof aimembero sfthehumanfâmily"(ProclamatioofTeheran,
1968).
Ttithereforeotcorreco arguethatheresidentsftheOccupied
55.
PalestiniTerritoryreexcludehm theprotectioaccordeby thmajor hurnan
rightstreat(andb,yimplicatio,fthespecifhuman rightswhichhave
crystdhd intoprincipsfcustomar yntanationalw),onaccoun tftheabsence
of aGovernment-citizrelationshT.hisargumens seriousflawd. Itdeniethe
universnlaturhurnarighthave attainca,weiiasthefat thatthelocusof
hummrights vests inthindividulndnotintheGovemment tstandstoreason
thatevenwheretheGovernment-citiz~eelationshsieplacewithan Occupying
Power-individurallationshthiunilateralctinwhichtheindividplayedno
I de, oannostpiriawaytheprotectiaffordedbyintemationhlumanrîghtlaw:the
individuarlemtinsthebeneficoyfatleasacoreofhuman rightandtheprotection
i roaffordedT. bcontentioinph's 2-4ofths"Summar yegaiPositioof
' theGovernrnenotfïsrae(Annex 1totheReporotftheSecretary-Generreparcd
1 pursuantoûencrailUsmbly Rcr~lutimEiS-1013(rUES -O/24Bdate3iDanmber
2003)whichappear o statethatneittheprotectioaffordebyinternational
humanitarilanwnorby thatcontainintheintemationdCovenanotfCiviand
Politicl ightareavailabeotheresidenofOccupiedPaIestinianerritory:a
positionthmates alegalIactrwithregardtotheOccupiedPalestiniTenitory
wherethereino protectiofany kinof individuasis-à-vtheûccupying
Power,istotaluntenable.
56.
i Withregartospecifihuman righttkîare&d bytheco-ction of
theSepmation 1,both theRem oftheSecretsty-Generaieparedmuantto
/
( CeneraAlssemblyRemlutionES-10/ d1ata24 Novembe 2r003aswellasthe
I ReportoftheSpecitrl apporteoftheConunissioonHuman Rightsonthe
I
( situatiofhimiannghtsb thPalestinkmerritoneoccipiedbyIsraelsin1967
/ rcferstotheexpropriatofland,thedestructinffnutandolivbecs,rbe destructioofpropertthei-gement offreedomofmovementi ,nfringemcnosf
therighttoeducation,ork,anadequatestandaroflivinandhealthcareand
treatmeningeneraolmidents inan inhuman waycontrar o theobligations
containedntheInternationColvenantnCivilandPoliticRlight,the
InternationalovenmotnEconomi Sc,cialandCulturRlight,heConventioonn
theRightsoftheChiland theFourthGenevaConvention.
57. Whiletheseactionareperseinviolatioofthemostbasicprinciplof
intedonal human rightlaw,theimpactthereoisbeingcompoundebdythefact
thathesemeasuns,andtheveryfactoftheconstructinftheSeparatioWall,
neverbejustifidbymilitanecessitandaredisproporîionaoethethteattheyare
directtowards.
V.CONCLUSION
I 58. ItisourcontentiohattheconsiruetinftheSeparation diisillegd,and
rcgardi csdsrwhichpretextiisbein000smi~b~ theprncticdconsqm~e of
i
i theexistinandplmai SepsratioWallisthatitibeingconstmtedon Palestinian
i
/ OccupiedTemto~y i, cludinnandaroun dastJausalem .hisaction,whicis
/ clearlillegaifnms ofinternationalw,representhedefactaonnexatioofpms
1 ofùiattmîto~. Thismustbeviewed asoneofthemon raiousconsequen cftse
constructinftheSeparation aH.
59. AlthoughIml hasIegitirnsecuritconcems tissubmittethatthe
consmictiooftheSeparat Wialisa disproportionaneunnecessm aeysure
whichdoesnotrepresenatfegitirneecurimeasute,asitstretchshiconcept
bond al1rneasure,hilalsoviolatianumbe rfbasicprinciplofinternational
Iaw,suchastheprohiitioontheacquisitiof tenltoby forcetherighofthe
Palestinineopletoself-determinatondtherightthathePaiestinipeopleare
accordeh tennsofinternationhldtarian lawandinternationhlumariyhts
law. 60. Furthermor aethi SepmationWallwillineffet becomade&o border
betweenIsraelndPalestiniwill,insteof bringinsecuritoIsrael,ndennine
1 internatioaltempttobnngabout acomprehcnsivjes1andlastinpeaceinthe
l
I regionbasedon thetwo-stasolution.
i
61. ItisthmforsubmittedthatheCourtshoiJdfindthattheconstructnfîhe
!
i WallisiIlegalintermofinternatiollw.
1
I MR A222 GOOLAM HOOSEIN
1
I DEPUT'Y MINISTER OFMlREIGN AKFAIRS
i
I
FOR AM) ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT
I OF THE REPUBLIC OPSOVM APlUCA
DATE:
Written Statement submitted by the Government of the Republic of South Africa