Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 21 May 2024
145. Deputy Ivana Bacik asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will comment on the statement of Ireland in the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Israeli Practice and Policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory on 22 February 2024; and if he will comment on the statement of the Attorney General at [37], and its relation to the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018. [23010/24]
Amharc ar fhreagraOn 25 July 2023, Ireland submitted a written statement to the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion case 'Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem'. Ireland also participated in the public hearings in this case, with the Attorney General making an oral statement to the Court on behalf of Ireland in the Peace Palace in The Hague on 22 February 2024.
The Government’s objective in making submissions in this case was to encourage the Court to clarify the rights of the Palestinian people in international law, not least so that these may be fully respected in the future settlement of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict.
Ireland’s submissions to the Court focused in particular on Israeli settlements in Palestine and related activities. These submissions concluded that settlements and related activities have violated international law in a number of significant ways, and that settlement activity is being used to annex Palestinian territory and deny the Palestinian people their right to self-determination.
The prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination are fundamental principles of international law with the character of peremptory norms. As the International Law Commission has recently concluded, peremptory norms of general international law give rise to obligations owed to the international community as a whole, in relation to which all states have a legal interest. Ireland's submissions argue that Israeli settlements and related activity constitute serious breaches of these norms and obligations.
The submissions also address the legal consequences of these serious breaches. They contend that, under the branch of international law known as the law of state responsibility, where a state has committed a serious breach of a peremptory norm of general international law all states are obliged to cooperate to bring that serious breach to an end, and not to recognise as lawful any situation created by that breach, nor to render aid or assistance in maintaining any such situation.
In particular, drawing on the Court’s caselaw, the submissions argue that states and international organisations like the EU that have legal competence to regulate trade with third countries should do this by reviewing their trading relationships with the settlements. This was the approach taken by the EU in response to Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014.
In the case of Ireland, as with all EU Member States, competence for external trade policy lies exclusively with the European Union. The EU already applies a policy of differentiation to distinguish trade with Israel from trade with the settlements. Once the Court delivers its Advisory Opinion, which we expect will be in the coming months, we will engage at EU level to consider whether any further actions are necessary.
The Government’s position on the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 is in line with this position. The clear legal advice on the matter is that the Bill, in its current form, is not compatible with EU law, including for the reason that the EU has exclusive competence for external trade. As such, the Bill would not be implemented and the Government is, therefore, not in a position to take it forward.
