Enreg----------el:
InternatiolOU*of Justi3eo .nr, 2004/36
Filedin theRegist:yon
EMBASSY OF THE FEDERATIVE REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL
Au Greffier de la
Cour Internationale deustice,
M. Philippe Couvreur
La Haye, le 30Janvier 2004.
Monieeur le Greffier,
En réponse à votre lettre 119839, du 19 décembre2003, j'ail'honneur de
vous faire parvenir, ci-joint, les commentaires du Government brésilien sur la
question des Consé ences luridiaues de l'édificationd'un mur dans le territoire
plestinien occupé.
Veuillez agréer, Monsieeur le Greffier, les assurances de ma haute
considération.
dberto Vergne Saboia
Ambassadeur THE FEDERATIVE REPUBLICOF BRAZlL
The Resolution adopted by the Tenth Emergency Special Session of
the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) requests an Advisory Opinion of the
International Court of Justice on the followingquestion:
'mat are the legal consequences arising from the construction of the
wall being built by Israel, the occupyingPower, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,
including in and around East Jerusalem, as described in the report of the Secretary-
General, considering the rules and principles of international law, includmg the
Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and relevant Secwity Council and General
Assembly resolutions?"
Brazil voted in favour of the aforementioned UNGA Resolution, as it
believes an ICJ Advisory Opinion would be appropriate, given the nature of ths
matter. In this regard, the position of the Brazihan Government is the following:
-ongoing construction of the wall by Israel, in departure of the
Armistice Line of 1949, as described in the report of the Secretary General (A/ES-
10/248) provides evidence that Israel is not complying with the UNGA's demand,
stated in resolution ES-10/13, that it "stop and reverse the construction of the wall in
the Occupied Palestinian Territory";
-although we acknowledge Israel's right to protect its people from
terrorist attacks, and note Israel's statement that the wall is aoraq measure, such
construction has evident political and legalimplications;
-the measures that Israel takes for its own defense must be in
accordance with universally recognized standards of human rights and International
Humanitarian Law, in particular as regards the obligations of the occupying power
towards the civilian population of occupiedterritories;
-politically, the wall is clearly divisive and contrary to the spirit of the
confidence-buildingmeasures that should accompany the peace process as outhed in
the "Road Map"; the construction of the wall inside occupied Palestinian territory
would impair future negotiations; for essentialiythese reasons, the construction of the
wall has been termed "a deeplycounterproductive act" by the UNSG;
-legally, the UNGA has stated that construction of the wall inside
occupied territory is in contradiction to relevant provisions of international law. This
seems to be the case, in particular, as regards the obligations of the occupying power
outlined in International Humanitarian Law, including the Fourth Geneva
Convention. It is therefore appropriate for the ICJ to deliver an advisory opinion that
would clari5 for the entire international cornmunity the legal aspectsof the issue.
Letter dated 30 January 2004 from the Ambassador of the Federative Republic of Brazil to the Netherlands, together with the Comments of the Brazilian Government