The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction - Item 85 (A/81/205) Status of the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the protection of victims of armed conflicts - Item 81 (A/81/290)
🇵🇸 State of Palestine, 🇮🇱 Israel
Thank you, Ambassador. Thank you, Ambassador, for giving me the floor. In their statement, the Israeli representative said that no one abuses or uses international law and interja and international justice more than the Palestinian delegation. The use of the word abuse is troubling, especially because it's coming from a representative of a state that is single-handedly destroying the international law-based order. A state who for 80 years violated international law and abused international law in order to cover up for its violations instead of protecting the international law-based order. And a state that attacks and intimidates judges, international courts, human rights defenders, international organizations, member states, the United Nations, the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Human Rights Council. A state whose declared enemy is the law and is the truth and the facts, and it attacks anyone that exposes its crimes. A state whose violations of international law has haunted the international law based order for over eighty years. But what makes the use of the word abuse a little bit more troubling, it indicates a deep lack of understanding of historical contexts. After the horrors of World War Two, The international community promised never again, and it collectively built the international law based order. The International Court of Justice, the United Nations, the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, the International Criminal Court. All these were not built by the Palestinian people. They were built by you, the international community. They were built by humanity collectively. They were not built by one state against the other, and they were not built for one people or the other, but for everyone, and everyone includes the Palestinian people. They were built to fulfill the promise of never again. And they are built they are not a threat to law abiding states like the majority of member states in this room. And stemming from our commitment and the commitment of the state of Palestine to the UN Charter, to its purposes and principles, and to international law. We resort to the cornerstone of this international law-based order, which is the peaceful settlement of dispute, in accordance with the Yuan Charter. I do understand that the concept of a peaceful settlement of dispute is a foreign concept to the Israeli representative, whose state is committed not to the law but to its destruction, whose state fears the law. Resorting to the peaceful settlement of dispute is not an abuse of international law. If Israel doesn't want to be standing trial for genocide before the ICJ, maybe it should not be committing genocide. And if its officials and if it doesn't want its officials to be internationally wanted fugitives, maybe they should not be committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. If Israel doesn't want commission of inquiry reports, maybe they should not be committing violations of international law. And if it doesn't want General Assembly resolutions, maybe they should not be committing violations of the UN shorter, including the self determination of the Palestinian people. The problem is not the resorting to international to peaceful settlements of dispute. The problem is not international law. The problem is not the ICJ, which is enshrined in the in in the uncharter. The problem is committing violations of international law. The problem is Israel's 80 years long of violations of international law. But Israel wants to commit crimes, it wants to get away with it, and wants its victims to die in silence and not defend themselves or seek justice. So in response we say that we are proud that we use international law over bombs, and that we are proud that we choose civilization over barbarity, and we are proud that we use peace over destruction, and that we are proud that we use justice, not vengeance. And I dare the Israeli representative to say the same. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Once again, we have witnessed how the Palestinians turn any subject or legal item, regardless of its nature, into yet another opportunity for politicization. They cannot engage with legal issue without manipulating it, stripping it for its proper context, and attempting to distort it to fit their own political interests. This is precisely why any consideration of International Law Commission's work. And its potential outputs in this committee must be approached with the utmost caution. There will be always irresponsible actors like the Palestinian delegation, eager to take legal products, distort their meaning, strip them for their context, and weaponize them for political purposes. When we work on the development of international law, we must look beyond narrow, short term interests. We must think about future generations and long term integrity. Of international law. The Palestinians have demonstrated once again that their only contribution is yet another round of inflammatory rhetoric and politicization. If this is not the politicization of international justice, I do not know what it is. We categorically reject these empty accusations, and in order to spur this committee yet another unnecessary exchange, we will respond to them at the appropriate time and in the appropriate forum. If the Palestinian delegation wishes to raise political allegations, the appropriate venue is the Security Council Middle East open debate, which is taking place right now in the room next to this door, not this committee, whose mandate is to address legal questions. The Palestinian claim to deplore the politicization of international justice. They would do well to begin by looking in the mirror and examining their own contribution to precisely that phenomenon. They would also do this committee a favor by spurring us yet another round of right of replies. But let us be clear about something else. If the Palestinians want to talk about peaceful settlements of dispute, they should condemn their own terrorists, their own Palestinian terrorists. Hamas committed some of the most heinous crimes imaginable, not only during the horrific massacre of October 7th, but together with other Palestinian terrorist organizations that terrorized the region and the state of Israel for decades before the October 7th massacre. I grew up in Israel with the fear of boarding the bus, wondering whether it would be blown up by Hamas terrorists in Tel Aviv, in Haifa, or Jerusalem. And to this day, the Palestinians continue to glorify terrorists, pay them salaries, and celebrate their attack. There is nothing for us to learn from the Palestinian delegation about international justice while it continues to shield and protect terrorists and those responsible for gravest crimes. If the Palestinian delegation truly cares about international justice, they should start by condemning terrorism unequivocally, condemning the October 7 massacre, ending the glorification and financial rewards for terrorists, and ensuring that those responsible for these heinous crimes are held accountable. Only then might we begin to have a serious conversation about international justice. Until then, they can spur this committee the empty lectures on this subject. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Ambassador. It's uh it's very difficult to keep track of of of the Israeli representative statement between the incoherent yelling and shouting. Um we do sit in a legal committee that discusses international law, and international law is not a technical matter, it's a lived reality for millions of people around the world, including for the Palestinian people. And we are committed to international law, to the UN Charter, to its purposes and its principles. It's something that I dared the Israeli representative to say and has not said. In response, he said that they will respond in the appropriate time and the appropriate forum. And we always say that the appropriate time and the appropriate forum is now. And the appropriate time and the appropriate forum is on the ground. Prove to the international community that you are committed to international law. Prove to the international community that you are committed to international justice. Do not attack international courts. Do not attack the Human Rights Council or the General Assembly or the Security Council for exposing your crimes. Prove to all of us in the international community that you are committed to the law. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I will not take much more time of this committee just to say that I think that, you know, lowering down the level of the discussion in this room and to start with personal accusations or exchange between the Palestinian representative and myself would be another. uh bottom low of this level of the discussion in this room. So I will not uh cooperate with her uh intention or um new method of bullying or try like to uh move to another round of like personal accusation. I think that you know when we are sitting in this room everyone representing its own uh delegation and I think that at the very least we should be Respect or respectful to one each other. Everyone has its own interests. We have some conflicts. We have some disagreements. But I have never um talked directly about the Palestinian deli uh representative herself. I have some things to say, but I keep it to myself. I think this is not the right forum and not this is the right way. And I think that everyone should uh behave in this forum. And not let the hand of like lowering down the discussion even more. If the Palestinian wants to talk about human rights, about human dignity, about how we behave in international forum, I think that it that the very um the first stage could be to uh know how to react to each other. Because at the end of the day, all the people who are sitting in this room, whether the representative The Palestinian delegates, the State of Israel, or other delegates which are recognize me as a state or not. I always try to be respectful to them and not to lowering the level for empty personal accusations. We are not like bullying in the um in the um in the school or high school. This is not another session another scene of mean girls or other movie. I think that we should behave and we deserve more. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Verbatim from the transcript. A reply is identified from its own words, the Chair's grant, or its place in the right-of-reply sequence; delegations and addressees follow the transcript's attribution.