The ICJ Advisory Opinion and Israeli Law: The ICJ Advisory Opinion and the Duty to Distinguish Between Israel and the Occupied Territories

Tamar Hostovsky Brandes (author)

Export Metadata

Raw

Metadata
Title	The ICJ Advisory Opinion and Israeli Law
Subtitle	The ICJ Advisory Opinion and the Duty to Distinguish Between Israel and the Occupied Territories
Contributor	Tamar Hostovsky Brandes (author)
DOI	https://doi.org/10.59704/62e7e2c461ae93d8
Landing page	https://verfassungsblog.de/the-icj-advisory-opinion-and-israeli-law/
License	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
Publisher	Verfassungsblog
Published on	2025-09-09
Long abstract	This post examines the relationship between the Advisory Opintion and Israeli law with respect to the duty to distinguish between Israel and the OPT. While the Opinion requires States to distinguish between Israel and the OPT in their dealings with Israel, and to omit acts that may strengthen Israel’s hold of the Territories, calls for such distinction are a civil tort under Israeli law, and those making them can be denied entry to Israel. As a result, Israelis are unlikely to support the Opinion. This will contribute to the growing gap between the international discourse and the domestic discourse in Israel with respect to the OPT.
Language	English (Original)

This post examines the relationship between the Advisory Opintion and Israeli law with respect to the duty to distinguish between Israel and the OPT. While the Opinion requires States to distinguish between Israel and the OPT in their dealings with Israel, and to omit acts that may strengthen Israel’s hold of the Territories, calls for such distinction are a civil tort under Israeli law, and those making them can be denied entry to Israel. As a result, Israelis are unlikely to support the Opinion. This will contribute to the growing gap between the international discourse and the domestic discourse in Israel with respect to the OPT.