'A permanent occupation is a legal oxymoron': ICJ

Paul Reichler, spoke next and is a legal representative on behalf of Palestine.

Reichler addressed the legality of Israel’s prolonged occupation, annexation and settlement of the occupied Palestinian territory.

“I will show that based on the applicable and the well-established and undisputed facts Israel’s 56-year occupation of Palestinian territory is manifestly and gravely unlawful and that international law requires that it’d be brought to an end completely and unconditionally,” he says.

Reichler says it is “crystal clear” that under international law, occupation can only be a temporary state of affairs.

“A permanent occupation is a legal oxymoron,” he tells the court.

“What makes Israel’s occupation unlawful is precisely its permanent character,” he continues, listing the four demonstrating factors:

• Israel’s de jure and de facto annexation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank
• Israel’s claims of sovereignty over these areas, which it refers to by their biblical names, Judea and Samaria, and considers integral parts of the State of Israel
• Israel’s establishment of hundreds of settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, with over 700,000 Israeli settlers, who have been promised by successive Israeli governments that they will never be uprooted
• The multitude of official statements and documents that openly declare Israel’s intention to incorporate all the occupied territory east of the Green Line into the state of Israel as a permanent part of a single Jewish State extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea