human rights in the occupied territories
143287292
Living in Denial: The Application of Human Rights in the Occupied Territories
Abstract Are human rights norms applicable to occupied territories in general, and to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in particular? The article examines the controversy that had arisen between Israel and the UN treaty monitoring bodies in relation to this question and critically analyzes Israel's three objections to such applicability: 1) the mutual exclusivity of humanitarian regime and human rights regime in occupied territories, the former being thus the only applicable law; 2) a restrictive interpretation of the jurisdictional provisions treaties; and 3) the lack of effective control in some of the territories. The article posits that the universal object and purpose of human rights treaties, which inform the proper interpretation of their jurisdictional clauses, require their applicability in all territories subject to the effective control of the state parties, as well as to other extra territorial exercises of government power directly affecting individuals. Consequently, international human rights law and international humanitarian law apply in occupied territories in parallel and not to the exclusion of one another. This position is confirmed by extensive practice of the international human rights monitoring bodies, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and by some decisions of the Israeli Supreme Court. In conclusion, the paper posits that Israel's refusal to apply the six principal human rights treaties to which it is party to the Occupied Territories is incompatible with its international law obligations and proceeds to propose modalities for the co application of both human rights and humanitarian law in occupied territories.
Israel Law Review
Orna Ben-Naftali Yuval Shany
211315933
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS IN THE FIELD OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION AS A COMPONENT OF LEGAL POLICY OF THE STATE AS FOR TEMPORARILY OCCUPIED TERRITORIES
O O Iliashko
211459601
THE PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS AT TEMPORARILY OCCUPIED TERRITORIES OF UKRAINE
O O Iliashko
211431127
INTERNATIONAL LEGAL SOURCES AND MECHANISMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION AT TEMPORARILY OCCUPIED TERRITORIES
O O Iliashko
45829301
Human rights in Israeli occupied territories
EDITOR, Successive reports by Amnesty International and other human rights bodies about the torture of Palestinian detainees during interrogation have become more difficult to ignore within Israel. Exposure of the institutionalised collusion of doctors during military service has recently forced the Israeli Medical Association to take a stand on this issue.1 At an international conference, "Mental Health and the Challenge of Peace," held in Gaza in mid September The first of its kind in the occupied territories evidence was produced of the after effects of these experiences for victims. The Gaza
BMJ
Derek Summerfield
159070903
Potential Effect of the Law of Belligerent Occupation on the Applicability of Investment Treaties in Occupied Territories
Abstract This article focuses on the applicability of bilateral investment treaties on the conduct of the occupying power towards foreign investments situated in the occupied territory. It examines the content of the obligation to respect the laws in force in the occupied territory as prescribed by Art. 43 of the Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land. Some authors proposed an idea that this obligation is a gateway provision for the applicability of international treaties which are in force in the occupied territory on the conduct of the occupier. They refer to the case law dealing with the applicability of human rights treaties in occupied territories. However, after the interpretation of this provision and inquiry into the case law, this paper reaches the conclusion that the obligation to respect the laws in force does not have this effect. Instead, it deals with the legislative powers of the occupying power.
Petr Stejskal
159030869
Problems of Adherence by Ukraine to International Commitments in Resolution of Cases in Trials that Took Place in Temporarily Occupied Territories
The legal procedure employed in criminal law where an individual was convicted by the courts of a temporarily occupied area of Ukraine has faced a number of challenges. When the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) finds that Ukraine has run afoul of its international commitments during a trial, the records of such criminal proceedings shall be considered by the Supreme Court's Grand Chamber, which shall apply the legal procedure regulations for newly discovered or exceptional circumstances, as outlined in Article 34 of the 2012 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. At the same time, such hearing would be hindered by absence of reliable procedural regulations for retention of records in a criminal case in the occupied territory, and therefore are likely not available for review by the Supreme Court. In this article, the authors attempt to present both the objective challenges and the possible methods and means to address them to the international scholarly community. These challenges stand in the way of the reform of the Ukrainian judicial system as a whole, and particularly affect Ukraine's adherence to its international commitments as it resolves of cases tried in the temporarily occupied territories. Considering the above, the authors analyzed the legislation and draft laws of Ukraine, as well as a number of international legislative documents, and outlined their own evidence supported academic opinion on how to resolve the problem as well as articulated their approach to the organizational and legislative aspects of Ukraine's adherence to its international commitments as the country's courts resolve such criminal cases.
Iryna Basysta Volodymyr Galagan
131346899
Israel Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Arab Occupied Territories@@lmmrst lsry'yly@ wt'thyrth `l~ Hqwq lnsn fy l'rDy l`rby@ lmHtl@
After World War II that picture was complicated by various proposals for partitioning the land of Palestine into territory for a Jewish State and territory for an Arab State. Through the League of Nations Man date System, Britain became the Mandatory power for Palestine, in effect holding Palestine in trust for a future Jewish State since the Balfour Declaration had been incorporated into the Palestine Mandate. The conclusion of the 1967 war had brought the whole of Palestine under Israel control and Israel immediately took administrative measures to unify the Holy City of Jerusalem. The Jordanian legal system was maintained and Israel publicly stated that its retention of such a system was not necessarily mandated by relevant International Law. However, autonomy in the legal sense is a question of degree, ranging from a grant of limited municipal control of local government authority conferred in domestic matters to extensive government powers in a federal state. In the situation of the occupied territories, the concept of autonomy has been rejected by Palestinians and their legitimate representative the PLO. Thus, the UN is under an international legal obligation to intervene effectively to rectify the Palestinian tragedy and when this is done the Arab Israeli conflict may be settled peacefully.
Omar Bakhashab
144697882
Legality and (dis)membership: removal of citizenship and the creation of 'virtual immigrants' in the 1967 Israeli occupied territories
This article seeks to show that liberal law continues to justify and legitimize displacements of minority populations, even in an age of universal human rights. As demonstrated by the Israeli court's 1988 decision legitimating the deportation of Mubarak Awad, citizenship and immigration laws provide juridical justifications for contemporary ethno national settler projects. In the aftermath of a territorial conflict that defines or redefines the bounds of the state, native minority populations are vulnerable to being legally recast as 'aliens' or 'virtual immigrants' National conflict may thus be transformed by legal formalism into a question of immigration law, allowing the power relations that produce state sovereignty to slip into the background.
Leila Kawar
145379413
THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO PROPERTY IN OCCUPIED TERRITORIES
The right to property was accorded the status of a human right as a result of its incorporation in international human rights instruments in the second part of the twentieth century. The right has acquired special importance as part of the freedom of the individual, his economic autonomy in modern democratic societies and generally as a significant element for the development of the individual's personality.1 Its recognition as a separate human right and its legal protection on an international level was the result of gradual efforts. It is still in the process of further legal elaboration, as regards both its scope and effect, by legal theory and jurisprudence.
International and Comparative Law Quarterly
Loukis G Loucaides