RE: Things Getting Crazy in East Jerusalem??
SUBTOPIC: Legality of Israel's Occupation of East Jerusalem?
⁜→ georgephillip, Quasar 44, et al,
(NOT TO BE A WISE-ASS) I need to know what defines:
• A legal Occupation?
• As distinguished from a defined "Illegal" Occupation?
PREFACE:
Is there a universally accepted regime as to what defines or makes these distinctions?
Teach me.
The Palestinians have a population in EJ but it appears that Jews actually bought this land several decades ago and now It’s going to the Israeli SC ??
Am I getting this correct ??
Doesn't that depend on the legality of Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem?
East Jerusalem - Wikipedia
"
David Ben-Gurion presented his party's assertion that 'Jewish Jerusalem is an organic, inseparable part of the State of Israel' in December 1949,
[5] and Jordan annexed East Jerusalem the following year.
[6][7]
"These decisions were confirmed respectively in the Israeli
Knesset in January 1950 and the Jordanian Parliament in April 1950.
[8]
"When occupied by Israel after the 1967 Six-Day War, East Jerusalem, with expanded borders, came under direct Israeli rule, though, according to
Ian Lustick, never formally
annexed.
[d]
"In a unanimous General Assembly resolution, the United Nations declared the measures changing the status of the city to be invalid.[11]"
(REFERENCES)
Article 42 Hague Regulation: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.
Article 43 Hague Regulation: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
PART 3.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
Article 22
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Nullum crimen sine lege
- A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court.
- The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.
- This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute.
(COMMENT)
I often hear this terminology/phraseology "illegal occupation" or the "legality of the occupation." But I don't know what it actually means? Many talk about the extension of "effective control." Others talk about the "the legal obligations that the status of an occupying
power entails." (If you comply with these obligations then the occupation is somehow "illegal.")
Now there might be some competing adjacent ideas that impact your consideration.
When we say "Palestinian Territories" what exactly do we mean. If we say Occupied Germany we are talking about one sovereign power occupying the territory of another sovereign power. This is the application of Article 42 when - a territory is placed under the authority of the hostile army. So, in 1967, who was the sovereign power over these territories and when did they assume sovereign authority?
Only "States" can enter into treaties (international agreement concluded between States • Article 2
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties). So up and until December 2012, "Palestine was NOT identified as a state or a country NOR could its authority be identified as a government." (
UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs). So when did the presence of the IDF in the West Bank or Jerusalem become a foreign Army occupying a foreign state?
Does the
Peace Treaty between Israel and Jordan (1994) that establishes the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel (
Article 3 - International Boundary) have an impact on the status of the undefined occupations?
• The treaty boundary encompasses the West Bank and Jerusalem, within the sovereignty of Israel.
• The international boundary was established without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
These are just a few of my questions on my confusion with these issues
("illegal occupation" - vs - "legality of the occupation") on the Question of Palestine.
(The BIG Question)
Who has the right to determine the correct answers?
Most Respectfully,
R
