Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T11:02:59.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE STATUS OF GAZA AS OCCUPIED TERRITORY UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2023

Safaa Sadi Jaber Open the ORCID record for Safaa Sadi Jaber [Opens in a new window]  and
Ilias Bantekas Open the ORCID record for Ilias Bantekas [Opens in a new window]
Safaa Sadi Jaber
Affiliation:
Doctor of Juridical Science Candidate at Hamad bin Khalifa University (Qatar Foundation) College of Law, Doha, Qatar, safaasjaber@gmail.com
Ilias Bantekas
Affiliation:
Professor, Hamad bin Khalifa University (Qatar Foundation) College of Law, and Adjunct Professor, Qatar Georgetown University, Doha, Qatar, ibantekas@hbku.edu.qa.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The traditional effective control test for determining the existence of a belligerent occupation requires boots on the ground. However, the evolution of the international law of occupation and the emergence of complex situations, particularly of a technological nature, necessitate a functional approach that protects the rights of occupied populations. The political, historical and geographical conditions of Gaza allow Israel to exert effective remote control. Despite the disengagement of Israel from Gaza in 2005 and the assumption of military and political authority by Hamas, this article argues that Israel nonetheless continues to be in effective occupation of the Gaza Strip on the basis of the following grounds: (1) the relatively small size of Gaza in connection with the technological superiority of the Israeli air force allows Israeli boots to be present in Gaza within a reasonable response time; (2) Hamas's authority and armed resistance do not impede the status of occupation; (3) the long pre-disengagement occupation and close proximity between Israel and Gaza (geography) allow for the remote exercise of effective control; and (4) all imports, exports in and out of Gaza, and any movement of persons are fully controlled and regulated by Israel.

Keywords

public international lawinternational humanitarian lawhuman rightsbelligerent occupationPalestine
Type
Shorter Articles
Information
International & Comparative Law Quarterly , Volume 72 , Issue 4 , October 2023 , pp. 1069 - 1088
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of British Institute of International and Comparative Law

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 B McKernan, ‘Israel Bombs Gaza Strip, Killing Three Islamic Jihad Leaders and Nine Civilians’ (The Guardian, 9 May 2023) <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/09/israel-bombs-gaza-strip-killing-three-islamic-jihad-leaders>.

2 Luft, M, ‘Living in a Legal Vacuum: The Case of Israel's Legal Position and Policy towards Gaza Residents’ (2018) 51(2) IsLR 193Google Scholar.

3 Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Gaza Disengagement Plan: Text of the Sharon Plan’ (April 2004). Translation available at: <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/text-of-the-gaza-disengagement-plan>.

4 ibid.

5 ibid.

6 Rynhold, J and Waxman, D, ‘Ideological Change and Israel's Disengagement from Gaza’ (2008) 123 PolSciQ 11Google Scholar.

7 Israeli Foreign Ministry, ‘Gaza Disengagement Plan: Cabinet Resolution Regarding the Disengagement Plan’ (6 June 2004) (Revised Disengagement Plan). Translation available at: <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/cabinet-resolution-regarding-the-disengagement-plan-june-2004>; Jaber Al-Bassiouni Ahmed and others v Prime Minister and Minister of Defence [2008] HCJ 9132/07, para 12. Translation available at: <https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/israel-power-cuts-gaza>.

8 Ministry of Foreign Affairs (n 3); Revised Disengagement Plan ibid.

9 Bhungalia, L, ‘A Liminal Territory: Gaza, Executive Discretion, and Sanctions Turned Humanitarian’ (2010) 75(4) GeoJournal 347CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, Suffocation and Isolation: 15 Years of Israeli Blockade on Gaza (2021) <https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/suffocation-and-isolation-15-years-israeli-blockade-gaza-enar>; United Nations Country Team, Gaza in 2020: A Liveable Place? (Office of the United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process 2012) <https://unsco.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/gaza_in_2020_a_liveable_place_english.pdf>.

11 The term ‘open-air prison’ was used by Professor Norman Finkelstein who borrowed it from the former British Prime Minister, David Cameron. See the Preface in Finkelstein, NG, Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom (University of California Press 2018) xiCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 State of Palestine, Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Palestine in Figures 2021 (Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics 2022) <https://pcbs.gov.ps/Downloads/book2604.pdf>.

13 Lieblich, E and Benvenisti, E, Occupation in International Law (OUP 2022)Google Scholar; M Luft, ‘10 Years 10, Judgments: How Israel's Courts Sanctioned the Closure of Gaza’ (Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement 2017) <https://www.gisha.org/UserFiles/File/LegalDocuments/10_Years_10_Judgments_EN_Web.pdf>; ‘Gaza Up Close’ (Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement 2021), <https://features.gisha.org/gaza-up-close/>.

14 Spoerri, P, ‘The Law of Occupation’ in Clapham, A and Gaeta, P (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Law in Armed Conflict (OUP 2014)Google Scholar; Noone, GP and Blank, LR, International Law and Armed Conflict: Fundamental Principles and Contemporary Challenges in the Law of War (Kluwer 2013)Google Scholar.

15 Carcano, A, The Transformation of Occupied Territory in International Law (Brill 2015) 68–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (adopted 12 August 1949, entered into force 21 October 1950) 75 UNTS 287, art 55 (Fourth Geneva Convention).

17 Cuyckens, H, Revisiting the Law of Occupation (Brill 2018) 34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Fourth Geneva Convention (n 16) arts 50, 56.

19 For more discussion on the relationship between human rights law and occupation law, see Milanović, M, ‘Norm Conflicts, International Humanitarian Law, and Human Rights Law’ in Ben-Naftali, O (ed), International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law (OUP 2011)Google Scholar; O Ben-Naftali and Y Shany, ‘Living in Denial: The Application of Human Rights in the Occupied Territories’ 37 IsLR 17; Milanovic, M, ‘Extraterritorial Derogations From Human Rights Treaties in Armed Conflicts’, in Bhuta, N (ed), The Frontiers of Human Rights (OUP 2016)Google Scholar; Campanelli, D, ‘The Law of Military Occupation Put to the Test of Human Rights Law’ (2008) 90 IRRC 653Google Scholar; Gioia, A, ‘The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Monitoring Compliance with Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflict’ in Ben-Naftali, O (ed), International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law (OUP 2011)Google Scholar.

20 Prosecutor v Mladen Naletilić and Vinko Martinovic (Trial Judgment) ICTY, IT-98-34-T (31 March 2003) para 211 (Naletilić); Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (the Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) (Judgment) [2005] ICJ Rep 168, 230: ‘there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the said authority was in fact established and exercised by the intervening State in the areas in question’.

21 Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land (adopted 18 October 1907, entered into force 26 January 1910) 205 CTS 277, art 42 (Hague Regulations 1907).

22 Spoerri (n 14) 188.

23 Noone and Blank (n 14) 171.

24 Spoerri (n 14) 188.

25 USA v Wilhelm List and Others (1947) 11 Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No 10 [1947] Case No 47, 55–6 (Hostages) <https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/b62664/pdf>.

26 Naletilić (n 20) para 214.

27 International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Expert Meeting: Occupation and Other Forms of Administration of Foreign Territory (ICRC 2012) 17–18.

28 Ferraro, T, ‘Determining the Beginning and End of an Occupation under International Humanitarian Law’ (2012) 94 IRRC 133, 147Google Scholar.

29 Cuyckens (n 17) 31.

30 Shany, Y, ‘The Law Applicable to Non-Occupied Gaza: A Comment on Bassiouni v. Prime Minster of Israel’ (2009) 42(1) IsLR 101Google Scholar, 106.

31 Hostages (n 25) 56.

32 Naletilić (n 20) para 217.

33 Solomon, S, ‘Occupied or Not: The Question of Gaza's Legal Status after the Israeli Disengagement’ (2011) 19 CardozoJIntl&CompL 33Google Scholar, 73, citing HCJ 102/82 Tsemel v Minister of Defence 37(3) PD 365 [1983] (Isr.).

34 Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (n 20) para 173.

35 ICRC (n 27) 19.

36 ibid 20.

37 See, for example, Fourth Geneva Convention (n 16) art 50 for the cooperation concerning the care and education of children and art 56 concerning the cooperation in supplying health care and hygiene to the occupied population.

38 Hague Regulations 1907 (n 21) art 47.

39 Naletilić (n 20) para 217 (emphasis added).

40 Darcy, S and Reynolds, J, ‘An Enduring Occupation: The Status of the Gaza Strip from the Perspective of International Humanitarian Law’ (2010) 15(2) JC&SL 211Google Scholar, 217–18.

41 ICRC (n 27) 21.

42 Luft (n 2).

43 A large part of occupation-related case law derives from Israeli courts, since the Israeli occupation is one of the rare occupants in history to admit its de facto control over territory, further reinforced by the fact that the Israeli HCJ has extended its jurisdiction to acts in occupied territories; Lieblich and Benvenisti (n 13) 2.

44 O Ben-Naftali, ‘PathoLAWgical Occupation: Normalizing the Exceptional Case of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Other Legal Pathologies’ in Ben-Naftali (ed) (n 19) 130.

45 Geva, M, ‘Military Lawyers Making Law: Israel's Governance of the West Bank and Gaza’ (2019) 44 L&SocInquiry 704Google Scholar, 716. This expansion of the lawyers’ participation in the military decision-making process has been significant since the 1987 Intifada.

46 International Commission of Jurists, The Road to Annexation: Israel's Maneuvers to Change the Status of the Occupied Palestinian Territory: A Briefing Paper (International Commission of Jurists 2019) 7 <https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Israel-Road-to-Annexion-Advocacy-Analysis-brief-2019-ENG.pdf>.

47 E Samson, ‘Is Gaza Occupied? Redefining the Status of Gaza Under International Law’ (2010) 25 AmUIntlLRev 915, 931.

48 For more discussion about the theory, see YZ Blum, ‘The Missing Reversioner: Reflections on the Status of Judea and Samaria’ (1968) 3 IsLR 279.

49 International Commission of Jurists (n 46) 8.

50 Ben-Naftali (n 44) 164–5; Benvenisti, E, The International Law of Occupation (2nd edn, OUP 2012) 206CrossRefGoogle Scholar; A Roberts, ‘Prolonged Military Occupation: The Israeli-Occupied Territories Since 1967’ (1990) 84 AJIL 44, 62; International Commission of Jurists ibid.

51 Samson (n 47) 932.

52 UNSC Res 242 (22 November 1967) UN Doc S/RES/242(1967), para 1(i). The Resolution called for the ‘withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict’.

53 Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Advisory Opinion) [2004] ICJ Rep 136, paras 70–79.

54 ibid, para 95.

55 ibid, paras 95–101.

56 Ben-Naftali (n 44) 134.

57 Shany, Y, ‘Faraway, So Close: The Legal Status of Gaza After Israel's Disengagement’ (2005) 8 YIntlHL 369Google Scholar, 383.

58 ibid 397.

59 M Sassoli, ‘The Role of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in New Types of Armed Conflicts’ in Ben-Naftali (ed) (n 19) 164–7.

60 Ajuri v the Commander of the IDF Forces in Judea and Samaria [2002] HCJ 7015/02, paras 44–51, unofficial translation available at: <https://hamoked.org/items/490_eng.pdf>.

61 ‘Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Four-Stage Disengagement Plan’ (Revised) (28 May 2004), translation available at: <https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-194935/>.

62 Bhungalia (n 9) 347.

63 Asmma Mahmoud Hamdan et al v GOC Southern Command et al [2007] HCJ 11120/05, unofficial translation available at: <http://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/publications/10_years_10_judgments/Hamdan%201.pdf>.

64 Solomon (n 33) 81.

65 Samson (n 47) 963–6.

66 Jaber Al-Bassiouni (n 7) para 12.

67 Shany (n 30) 106–8.

68 Luft (n 13) 17–18.

69 Rami Anbar and Others v Commander of the Southern Command and Others [2009] HCJ 5268/08, paras 5–8, unofficial translation available at: <https://hamoked.org.il/items/110492_eng.pdf>.

70 Anonymous v Minister of Defense et al [2011] HCJ 9329/10, unofficial translation available at: <http://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/publications/10_years_10_judgments/Anonymous%205.pdf>.

71 Luft (n 13) 6.

72 ibid 8–9.

73 Umayma Qishawi v Minister of Interior [2012] AAA 4620/11, para 2, unofficial translation available at: <http://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/publications/10_years_10_judgments/Qishawi%207.pdf>.

74 Luft (n 13) 31.

75 Roberts (n 50) 64.

76 Gross, A, The Writing on the Wall: Rethinking the International Law of Occupation (CUP 2017) 36CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The author gave the example of how the Israeli Supreme Court justifies the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories chiefly in the case of Ayub v the Minister of Defence (1979). Moreover, in the case of Aruji, the HCJ applied a dynamic interpretation of international law in order to expand the power of the military command rather than expanding the protection of civilians under the Geneva Conventions. For further discussion see Sassoli (n 59).

77 Y Shany, ‘Binary Law Meets Complex Reality: The Occupation of Gaza Debate’ (2008) 41 IsLR 68, 77.

78 ibid 85.

79 FS Cohen, ‘Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach’ (1935) 35(6) ColumLRev 809, 849.

80 A Gross, ‘Rethinking Occupation: The Functional Approach’ (Opinio Juris, 23 April 2012) <https://opiniojuris.org/2012/04/23/rethinking-occupation-the-functional-approach/>.

81 Western Front, Aerial Bombardment and Related Claims – Eritrea's Claims 1, 3, 5, 9–13, 14, 21, 25 & 26 (The State of Eritrea v The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia). Eritrea–Ethiopia Claims Commission (Partial Award) [2005] para 27 (emphasis added) <https://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_XXVI/291-349.pdf>.

82 Gross (n 80).

83 Jaber Al-Bassiouni (n 7).

84 Gross (n 80).

85 Cuyckens (n 17) 38–9.

86 UNSC Res 1860 (2009) (8 January 2009) UN Doc S/RES/1860(2009), ‘Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state’ (emphasis in original).

87 ICRC, ‘Fifty Years of Occupation: Where Do We Go from Here?’ (ICRC, 2 June 2017) <https://www.icrc.org/en/document/fifty-years-occupation-where-do-we-go-here>.

88 Amnesty International, ‘Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territories: The Conflict in Gaza: A Briefing on Applicable Law, Investigations, and Accountability’ (19 January 2009) 7 <https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/007/2009/en/>.

89 ‘Certainly, the physical disengagement from Gaza in 2005 and the tightening of the closure two years later did not lead to the removal of Israel's control over the Strip. On the contrary, the extent of Israel's control has only increased in recent years.’ Luft (n 13) 9.

90 Amnesty International (n 88) 7.

91 ‘50 Shades of Control’ (Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement 2017) <https://gisha.org/project/50shades-en/>.

92 Human Rights Council, ‘ Human Rights Situation in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied Since 1967, John Dugard’ (21 January 2008) UN Doc A/HRC/7/17, para 11.

93 Human Rights Council, ‘Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’ (25 September 2009) UN Doc A/HRC/12/48, para 278.

94 Li, D, ‘The Gaza Strip as Laboratory: Notes in the Wake of Disengagement’ (2006) 35(2) JPalestStud 38, 45Google Scholar.

95 Al-Haq, Shifting Paradigms: Israel's Enforcement of the Buffer Zone in the Gaza Strip (Al-Haq 2011) 7 <https://www.alhaq.org/cached_uploads/download/alhaq_files/publications/Shifting-Paradigms.pdf>.

96 Quoted by Al-Haq ibid 7.

97 Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, Farming in a Buffer Zone: The Conditions Gaza Farmers Face under Closure (Al Mezan Center for Human Rights 2020) 8.

98 ‘Closing In: Life and Death in Gaza's Access Restricted Areas’ (Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement 2018) 8 <https://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/publications/ARA_EN.pdf>.

99 ibid 5.

100 Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement (n 13).

101 Campanelli (n 19).

102 Naletilić (n 20) para 217.

103 Darcy and Reynolds (n 40) 237.

104 Human Rights Council (n 93) para 278.

105 Li (n 94) 48.

106 Libel, T and Boulter, E, ‘Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in the Israel Defense Forces: A Precursor to a Military Robotic Revolution?’ (2015) 160(2) RUSI J 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

107 ibid 70–1.

108 Li (n 94) 48.

109 McLaughlin, R and Nasu, H, ‘Introduction: Conundrum of New Technologies in the Law of Armed Conflict’ in Nasu, H and McLaughlin, R (eds), New Technologies and the Law of Armed Conflict (Asser Press 2014) 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

110 Li (n 94) 38–9.

111 It should be noted that this argument does not discuss the legality of resistance against the occupation, but that resistance does not change the fact of occupation. For a general discussion on the legality of resistance, read A Roberts, ‘Resistance to Military Occupation’ (2017) 111 AJIL Unbound 45.

112 Human Rights Council (n 93) para 278.

113 Darcy and Reynolds (n 40) 236.

114 Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘The Operation in Gaza, Factual and Legal Aspects’ (Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, July 2009) para 83 <https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/israelgaza-operation-cast-lead>.

115 ibid, paras 83–83.

116 Borrowing the words of the Hostages case (n 25) 56.

117 ibid.

118 Darcy and Reynolds (n 40) 237.

119 Naletilić (n 20) para 217.

120 ICRC (n 27) 30.

121 Lieblich and Benvenisti (n 13).

122 Roberts (n 50) 51.

123 Lieblich and Benvenisti (n 13).

124 See E Benvenisti, ‘The International Law of Prolonged Sieges and Blockades: Gaza as a Case Study’ (2021) 97 IntlLStud 969; Lieblich and Benvenisti ibid 165–6.

125 Benvenisti ibid 979.

126 ICRC, ‘International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts’ (8–10 December 2015) ICRC Doc 32IC/15/11, 12.

127 Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement (n 13).

128 Darcy and Reynolds (n 40) 238.

129 Sassoli (n 59) 48–9.