International Law and the Prolonged Occupation of Palestine

Abstract

In the law of armed conflict, the question of “prolonged occupation” is absent from the governing international instruments, and the notion has been little discussed in academic commentary, but Israel’s High Court has employed it in a number of decisions concerning the occupied Palestinian territory. The “prolonged occupation” of Palestine raises two legal issues in particular. The first is the effect of Article 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention which the International Court of Justice declared operative in the Legal consequences of the construction of a wall advisory opinion in 2004: was the Court correct to hold that, by virtue of Article 6(3), only some provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention still apply to Palestine? More importantly, what are the legitimate parameters for the exercise by Israel of the occupant’s legislative competence over the territory under Article 43 of the Hague Regulations and Article 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Has Israel exceeded its lawful powers in its administration of Palestine?

Keywords: Hague Regulations, Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel, Palestine, International Court of Justice, belligerent occupation, legislative powers, law of armed conflict, international humanitarian law