International Court of Justice and the Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences Arising from Construction of the Wall by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
On 8 December 2003 and at its Tenth Emergency Special Session United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution ES-10/14 requesting International Court of Justice for an Advisory Opinion on legal consequences arising from construction of the wall by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory. On 9 July 2004 the Court issued its Advisory Opinion while recognized its jurisdiction. In accordance with United Nations Charter, General Assembly Resolution 2625, the principle of self-determination of people, human rights and humanitarian law conventions, the Court concluded that the Wall was illegal and so had to be ceased immediately and Israel had to compensate. Moreover, other states have obligation not to recognise that situation and to promote realization of the principle of self-determination of people, to ensure respect for regulations of forth Geneva conventions (1949) and United Nations has obliged to adopt further measure in this matter.
Zarefar, A., & Hashemi, H. (2004). International Court of Justice and the Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences Arising from Construction of the Wall by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Journal of Legal Research, 3(5), 73-102.
MLA
Amin Zarefar; Hamid Hashemi. "International Court of Justice and the Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences Arising from Construction of the Wall by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory". Journal of Legal Research, 3, 5, 2004, 73-102.
HARVARD
Zarefar, A., Hashemi, H. (2004). 'International Court of Justice and the Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences Arising from Construction of the Wall by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory', Journal of Legal Research, 3(5), pp. 73-102.
VANCOUVER
Zarefar, A., Hashemi, H. International Court of Justice and the Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences Arising from Construction of the Wall by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Journal of Legal Research, 2004; 3(5): 73-102.
)