Written evidence submitted by International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (MENA0065)

 International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP)1 
is an independent organisation of lawyers, 
academics and politicians that works to protect and support the rights of Palestinians. ICJP was 
established with the objective of seeking justice and accountability for Israel’s longstanding, 
systematic violations of the rights of Palestinians under international law, including those which 
amount to international crimes.Introduction 
1. ICJP submitted evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee (“the Committee”) of the UK 
Parliament on 9 October 2023, in relation to the UK’s engagement with the Middle East and 
North Africa. 
2. However, considering the extreme escalation of hostilities in the occupied Palestinian 
territory (oPt) since 9 October, it is prudent to submit this addendum submission2 
regarding 
the UK government’s (“UK”) engagement with the Middle East and North Africa. This 
submission seeks to answer the same question that ICJP’s previous submission dated 9 
October 2023 sought to answer: “What are the possibilities for a two-state solution for Israel 
and Palestine and how can the UK engage with all the parties involved to help bring about a 
peaceful resolution of the conflict?” 
3. ICJP takes no position on a political solution to the conflict. As an expert legal organisation 
concerned with Palestinian rights, our mission is to advocate for compliance with 
international law and human rights, including the right of self-determination. We believe that 
the affected populations must determine a just and durable solution to the conflict. Thus, this 
submission will focus on the latter part of the question in relation to the UK’s engagement in 
achieving a peaceful resolution, rather than commenting on “possibilities for a two-state 
solution”. 
4. We recognise that the attacks by Palestinian armed groups in Israel on 7 October were 
deplorable, leaving over 1,400 Israelis dead, many of them civilians. Killing civilians and 
taking civilians as hostages are war crimes. These attacks must be properly investigated and 
those responsible held to account. Those held captive must be treated humanely, and hostages 
must be released without delay. 
1 
International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) website, available at: https://www.icjpalestine.com/. 
2 Note, this submission is an addendum and thus does not replace ICJP’s submission dated 9 October 2023. We 
respectfully request that both submissions are considered jointly by the Committee. 5. However, these acts do not justify Israel’s massive, indiscriminate and disproportionate 
military offensive on Gaza, actions which may amount to war crimes and crimes against 
humanity. 
6. UK government officials have repeatedly defended Israel’s assault on Gaza, stating that Israel 
has the right to self-defence. ICJP wishes to clarify that Israel does not have the ‘right to self- 
defence’ in the oPt as a matter of international law. Article 51 of the UN Charter provides for 
the use of force by a State in self-defence only in the case of an armed attack by another State. 
Article 51 does not apply to a situation involving an Occupying Power acting within 
territories that it occupies. Accordingly, Israel cannot invoke the right to self-defence under 
Article 51 to justify the use of military force in territories in which Israel itself 
exercises effective control. This was affirmed in the advisory opinion of the International 
Court of Justice in 2004, which established the non-applicability of self-defence under Article 
51 regarding Israel’s actions in the OPT. 3 
7. All States have the obligation to protect their citizens and others under their control. As an 
occupying power, Israel must comply with international humanitarian law (“IHL”) in the 
OPT, including Gaza, as set out under the four Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations 
and relevant customary norms. It is prohibited from harming civilians in occupied territory 
and must ensure their safety and security and the protection of their property. 
8. During situations of armed conflict, all actors – both State and non-State- must comply at all 
times with international law, including the IHL principles of necessity, proportionality, 
distinction and precaution. 
9. Despite overwhelming evidence that Israel has failed to comply with these principles in Gaza 
since 7 October, the UK government has continued to provide unconditional support for 
Israel’s actions, effectively providing tacit endorsement for serious violations of international 
law, including the potential commission of serious international crimes. 
10. Regrettably, rather than engaging to bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict, the 
actions of the UK government have been counterproductive, vastly reducing the prospect of a 
peaceful resolution to the “conflict”. This position will be qualified in reference to three core 
failures. 
a. First, the UK government’s categorisation of the relationship between Israel and the 
oPt as a ‘conflict’ fails to properly recognise the legal position, which is one of 
occupier and occupied. It thus fails to consider Israel’s obligations as an occupying 
power under IHL. Further, UK government officials have maintained Israel’s alleged 
adherence to international law without an evidential basis. 
b. Second, the UK’s refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire or condemn Israel’s 
unlawful acts contravenes the UK’s third state obligations under international law to 
prevent the potential commission of mass atrocity crimes. 
3 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a 
Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, International Court of Justice, 9 July 2004, paras 138-139, available 
at: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert- 
178825/#:~:text=I%20hereby%20transmit%20to%20the,in%20the%20Occupied%20Palestinian%20Territory. c. Third, in breach of the UK’s own Strategic Licensing Criteria policy, UK arms export 
licences to Israel have not been suspended, despite their likely unlawful use in the 
oPt. 
The UK’s categorisation of the conflict and Israel’s obligations under international law 
11. Since the escalation of hostilities on 7 October 2023, the UK have framed the conflict as 
Israel’s conflict against Hamas. For example, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak stated that Hamas 
was “responsible for this conflict” 
4 
, and Foreign Secretary James Cleverly referred to Israel’s 
“military campaign against Hamas.”5 The corollary flowing from that starting point has been 
the UK’s position that: “We support Israel’s right to self defence [against Hamas], in line with 
IHL, and continue to push for the protection of Palestinian civilians”, as confirmed by the 
Foreign Secretary.6 
12. The UK positing that the two sides of this conflict are Israel and Hamas is an inaccurate 
framing of the situation, bereft of the applicable international legal context. Further, the UK 
government has maintained its unequivocal support of Israel’s actions, purportedly in-line 
with IHL, despite overwhelming evidence of Israel’s actions squarely contravening IHL. 
These two failures will be dealt with in turn. 
13. First, the UK government’s classification of the conflict seemingly ignores Israel’s legal 
obligations as an occupying power and decontextualises the current situation of hostilities 
from Israel’s brutal 56-year military occupation of the oPt. 
14. There is clear evidence that Israel may have contravened its legal obligations as an occupying 
power. Israel’s total siege on Gaza since 8 October 2023 amounts to collective punishment of 
the civilian population.7 The withholding of food, water and other basic necessities from 
civilian populations during international armed conflicts is expressly forbidden under IHL,8 
4 The Guardian, Rishi Sunak calls for ‘specific pauses’ in Israel-Hamas conflict, 25 October 2023, available at: 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/25/rishi-sunak-calls-for-specific-pauses-in-israel-hamas-conflict 
5 Twitter, James Cleverly tweet, 27 October 2023, available at: 
https://twitter.com/JamesCleverly/status/1717984597915394473 
6 
Ibid. 
7 Yoav Gallant, Israel’s Defence Minister, said “I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will 
be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,” and “We are fighting human animals and we are acting 
accordingly” See: Times of Israel, Defense minister announces ‘complete siege’ of Gaza: No power, food or 
fuel, 9 October 2023, available at: https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/defense-minister-announces- 
complete-siege-of-gaza-no-power-food-or-fuel/ 
8 Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention provides that “No protected person may be punished for an 
offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation 
or of terrorism are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are 
prohibited.” https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-33#:~:text=12%20August%201949.- 
,Article%2033%20%2D%20Individual%20responsibility%2C%20collective%20penalties%2C%20pillage%2C 
%20reprisals,Pillage%20is%20prohibited. The ICRC commentary of 1958 provides that collective punishment 
refers to “penalties of any kind inflicted on persons or entire groups of persons, in defiance of the most 
elementary principles of humanity, for acts that these persons have not committed” and rendered without regard 
to due process of law: See: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article- 
33/commentary/1958?activeTab=undefined and amounts to war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute of the 
International Criminal Court (ICC). 
15. At the same time, Israel has launched indiscriminate airstrikes bombarding Gaza, killing over 
8,306 people, 9 
including at least 3,542 children. It has bombed thousands of civilian homes, 
as well as UN installations, hospitals, schools, mosques and churches, and bakeries. More 
than 1,000 children are missing—injured or presumed dead—beneath the rubble of apartment 
buildings and refugee camps that Israel has completely flattened.10 
16. Further, on 13 October 2023, Israel issued a directive to 1.2 million people in Gaza to 
immediately leave their homes in northern Gaza and move south.11 this order may well 
amount to both a war crime and a crime against humanity, particularly the crime of forcible 
transfer and displacement. 
17. Collective punishment12 
, the deliberate targeting of civilians through airstrikes13 
, and the 
forcible transfer of civilians14 are also all grave breaches of Israel’s IHL obligations. 
. 
18. UK government officials have repeatedly stated that Israel’s action are in line with 
international law without any evidence for this claim. When asked in parliament by Brendan 
O’Hara MP if he had seen evidence or made aware of any evidence that Israel had breached 
IHL, Foreign Secretary Cleverly said it was not his role “to make an assessment on the 
interpretation of events which are unfolding as we speak”15 
. 
9 Defense for Children International, Palestine, 40 percent of Palestinians killed in Gaza are children 
30 October 2023, available at: https://www.dci- 
palestine.org/40_percent_of_palestinians_killed_in_gaza_are_children 
10 Defense for Children International, Palestine, Gaza Update, X, 6:25 pm, 31 October 2023, available at: 
https://x.com/DCIPalestine/status/1719420290940252574?s=20 
11 Al Jazeera, Fear confusion as Israel issues evacuation order for northern Gaza, 13 October 2023, available at: 
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/13/fear-confusion-as-israel-issues-evacuation-order-for- 
northerngaza#:~:text=Israel%27s%20order%20for%201.1%20million,seventh%20day%20of%20Israel%27s%2 
0bombardment 
12 Collective punishment is absolutely prohibited in international conventional and international customary law. 
Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “No protected person may be punished for an offence he or 
she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism 
are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.” 
Collective punishment is also prohibited under Article 50 of the Hague Regulations 1907 and Article 75 of the 
First Additional Protocol of the Geneva Conventions 1949. The ICRC commentary of 1958 provides that 
collective punishment refers to “penalties of any kind inflicted on persons or entire groups of persons, in 
defiance of the most elementary principles of humanity, for acts that these persons have not committed” and 
rendered without regard to due process of law: See: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihltreaties/gciv-1949/article- 
33/commentary/1958?activeTab=undefined 
13 Article 32 of the Fourth Geneva Convention stipulates that it occupying parties are “prohibited from taking 
any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their 
hands.” Article 51(4) of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 states 
“Indiscriminate attacks [on civilian populations] are prohibited” 
14 Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention stipulates that “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as 
deportations of protected persons from the occupied territory to the territory of the occupying power or to that of 
any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive…The Occupying Power shall not 
detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the 
population or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
15 The Guardian, UK ‘trying to make sure Israel abides by international law,’ James Cleverly tells Commons – 
as it happened, 24 October 2023, available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/oct/24/rishi- 
sunak-cabinet-meeting-israel-gaza-foreign-office-commons-uk-politcs-latest-updates 19. However, the Foreign Secretary has made multiple statements since 7 October 2023 citing the 
UK’s unequivocal support of Israel’s actions, and stating that Israel has a right to self- 
defence.16 Though the Foreign Secretary also called for “discipline and professionalism and 
restraint from the Israeli military",17 the UK’s position has remained unchanged: support for 
“Israel's self-defence in line with international humanitarian law.”18 
20. The fact that the UK’s position has remained unchanged, despite overwhelming and growing 
evidence of Israel’s continued and ever more egregious violation of IHL, international 
criminal law and international human rights law, is deeply concerning and contradicts 
previous commitments made by the Foreign Secretary. 
21. In the Foreign Secretary’s opinion piece in the Guardian, dated December 2022, he stated: 
“We [the UK] are not passive observers and we should not merely voice our feelings: we will 
use our country’s leverage to make a difference.”19 The validity of this sentiment in 
upholding the rights of Palestinians is questionable. Rather than addressing Brendan O’Hara 
MP’s question of IHL breaches by Israel, the Foreign Secretary obfuscated and deflected the 
question. 
22. Further, when asked about the allegations of Israeli forces using banned white phosphorus in 
Gaza, the Foreign Secretary retorted that, “What we have seen over and over again is 
accusations directed at Israel which have proven to be completely baseless…So any decisions 
that I make or the UK government makes will be based on accurate assessment rather than 
social media speculation.”20 These comments were made days after Human Rights Watch 
issued its report confirming the use of white phosphorus in Gaza: 
“Human Rights Watch verified videos taken in Lebanon and Gaza on October 10 and 
11, 2023, respectively, showing multiple airbursts of artillery-fired white phosphorus 
over the Gaza City port and two rural locations along the Israel-Lebanon border, and 
interviewed two people who described an attack in Gaza.”21 
23. This verified evidence of the use of white phosphorus by a reputable international human 
rights organisation cannot be described as “social media speculation”. However, this is 
another example of the Foreign Secretary deflecting and obfuscating questions that are 
16 In the Cairo Peace Summit, Foreign Secretary Cleverly stated: "The UK is clear and has been consistently 
clear that Israel has the right to self defence and the right to secure the release of those who are kidnapped on 
Oct. 7" See: Reuters, UK foreign minister Cleverly calls for restraint from Israeli military, 21 October 2023, 
available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/uk-foreign-minister-cleverly-calls-restraint-israeli- 
military-2023-10-21/ 
17 Ibid. 
18 Twitter, FCDO tweet, 28 October 2023, available at: 
https://twitter.com/FCDOGovUK/status/1718363903816569263 
19 Guardian, Britain is not a passive observer on the world stage. We want oligarchs and dictators to fear us, 9 
December 2022, available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/dec/09/britain-oligarchs- 
dictators-fear-us-britain 
20 The Independent, Hamas wants to spark war across Middle East, James Cleverly warns Israel, 15 October 
2023, available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/gaza-hamas-israel-james-cleverly- 
b2430013.html 
21 Human Rights Watch, Israel: White Phosphorus Used in Gaza, Lebanon, 12 October 2023, available at: 
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/israel-white-phosphorus-used-gaza-lebanon deemed critical of Israel’s unlawful conduct. The UK ought to be led by facts and the rule of 
law, not providing Israel with a carte blanche without scrutiny. 
Necessity of ceasefire to prevent further commission of serious international crimes in Gaza 
24. The UK has, to date, failed to call for a ceasefire. The draft resolution introduced by the 
Russian Federation in the UN Security Council called for inter alia “an immediate, durable 
and fully respected humanitarian ceasefire.”22 The UK voted against this resolution.23 On 27 
October, the UK abstained from a UN General Assembly resolution calling for a 
humanitarian ceasefire. 24 
25. Foreign Secretary Cleverly has also stated that “calls for a ceasefire in the abstract are not 
going to help the situation”25 
. He also stated, “I have seen or heard nothing from Hamas that 
gives me any confidence that they either desire or would abide by calls for a ceasefire.”26 
Prime Minister Sunak’s spokesperson also said that the “prime minister did not back a 
ceasefire as that would only benefit Hamas” 
27 
. However, on 23 October 2023 the Prime 
Minister committed to a further £20 million of humanitarian aid for civilians in the oPt. 28 
26. Though the immediate access of humanitarian aid to Gaza is now absolutely critical given 
Israel’s siege and resulting humanitarian catastrophe, the sole focus on humanitarian aid only 
serves to divert attention from the critical issues at hand. These include the need for an 
immediate ceasefire and an end to Israel’s military offensive in Gaza; the need for Israel to 
immediately stop its total siege of Gaza and lift the illegal 16 year blockade; the need for 
Israel to rescind its cruel and illegal order for over 1.2 million civilians in northern Gaza to 
evacuate to the south; and a recognition of the root causes of the conflict, that is, the need for 
an end to the occupation and recognition of the right of the Palestinian people to self- 
determination. 
27. Moreover, UN experts and legal scholars and civil society organisations have also warned 
that Israel’s actions in Gaza may amount to genocide. On 19 October 2023, nine UN Special 
22 UN Press, Security Council Fails to Adopt Either of Two Draft Resolutions Addressing Conflict and 
Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza, 25 October 2023, available at: https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15464.doc.htm 
23 Security Council rejects Russian resolution on Gaza, 16 October 2023, available at: 
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1142427 
24 General Assembly Adopts Resolution Calling for Immediate, Sustained Humanitarian Truce Leading to 
Cessation of Hostilities between Israel, Hamas, GA/12548, 27 October 2023, available at: 
https://press.un.org/en/2023/ga12548.doc.htm#:~:text=Calling%20for%20an%20immediate%20and,situation%2 
0in%20the%20Middle%20East. 
25 The Independent, Calls for ceasefire aren’t going to help Israel-Hamas situation, says James Cleverly, 28 
October 2023, available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/israel-hamas-ceasefire-james-cleverly- 
b2437594.html 
26 Ibid. 
27 BBC, Rishi Sunak backs calls for humanitarian pauses in Israel-Hamas war, 25 October 2023, available at: 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67218948 
28 UK Government, Extra £20 million in humanitarian aid doubles UK support to Palestinian civilians, 23 
October 2023, available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/extra-20m-in-humanitarian-aid-doubles-uk- 
support-to-palestinian-civilians Rapporteurs undersigned a letter expressing “outrage against the deadly strike at Al Ahli 
Arab Hospital in Gaza City, which killed more than 470 civilians”29 
. The experts then 
commented: 
“Considering statements made by Israeli political leaders and their allies, 
accompanied by military action in Gaza and escalation of arrests and killing in the 
West Bank, there is also a risk of genocide against the Palestinian People… “It is 
time to immediately cease fire and ensure urgent and unimpeded access to essential 
humanitarian supplies, including food, water, shelter, medicine, fuel and electricity.”30 
(emphasis added) 
28. Moreover, the Center for Constitutional Rights in the USA has stated: “Israel is attempting 
to commit, if not actively committing, the crime of genocide in the occupied Palestinian 
territory”31 (emphasis added). 
29. Calling for temporary pauses of hostilities, as the UK has done, will do nothing to prevent the 
commission of further mass atrocity crimes in Gaza. Considering the close diplomatic 
relationship enjoyed by the UK and Israel, the UK must use all means at its disposal, 
including diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions, to prevent Israel from committing 
further mass atrocity crimes in Gaza. To date, there has been no meaningful engagement from 
the UK to seek an end to the hostilities and ensure civilian lives are protected through a 
ceasefire. 
Arms sales to Israel 
30. The UK arms exports to Israel have not been suspended, despite their likely use in the oPt. 
31. The UK’s own policy, the Strategic Licensing Criteria32 (“Strategic Criteria”), stipulates that 
arms may not be exported where there is a clear risk they might be used in violations of 
international law. Criterion 2(c) of the Strategic Criteria stipulates that arms may not be 
exported where “having assessed the recipient country's attitude towards relevant principles 
established by international human rights instruments…it determines there is a clear risk 
that the items might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international 
humanitarian law.” (Emphasis added) 
32. It is known that the UK have provided arms to Israel in the past. For example, on 9 October 
2023, Prime Minister Sunak stated, “we have provided them [Israel] in the past the kinds of 
equipment that they’ve used to defend themselves over the past couple of days.”33 Though this 
29 OHCHR, Gaza: UN experts decry bombing of hospitals and schools as crimes against humanity, call for 
prevention of genocide, 19 October 2023, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/10/gaza- 
un-experts-decry-bombing-hospitals-and-schools-crimes-against-humanity 
30 Ibid. 
31 Center for Constitutional Rights, Emergency Legal Briefing Paper: Israel’s Unfolding Crime of Genocide of 
the Palestinian People & U.S. Failure to Prevent and Complicity in Genocide, 18 October 2023, available at 
https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/attach/2023/10/Israels-Unfolding-Crime_ww.pdf 
32 UK Parliament, Trade Policy Update - Strategic Export Licensing Criteria, 8 December 2021, available at: 
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2021-12-08/hcws449 
33 Sky News, Rishi Sunak to hold emergency COBRA meeting on Israel-Hamas war, 9 October 2023, available 
at: https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-to-hold-emergency-cobra-meeting-on-israel-hamas-war-12980935 does not confirm the use of UK arms in the hostilities in oPt since 7 October 2023, it is 
possible that they had been used. 
33. Through analysing the actions of the Israeli authorities for the purposes of Criterion 2(c) of 
the Strategic Criteria, it is clear that their attitude towards international human rights 
instruments is dismal, an objective assessment of Israel’s conduct will inevitably result in a 
finding that Israel routinely contravenes IHL, and any UK weapons exported to Israel will 
likely be used in violation of IHL. Israel’s use of white phosphorus on civilian populations, as 
aforementioned in addition to the plethora of other IHL abuses such as collective punishment 
and indiscriminate bombarding of civilians, exemplifies Israel’s total and consistent disregard 
of IHL. 
34. As there cannot be any guarantee that, if weapons are exported to Israel, they will not be used 
unlawfully, under the Strategic Criteria, all extant weapon licences must be suspended or 
revoked. Further, the UK ought to take an undertaking confirming that no other licences will 
be granted until Israel ceases to violate international law. 
Recommendations 
35. Considering the foregoing, ICJP respectfully requests the Committee to make these 
recommendations, to ensure the UK can engage to help bring about a peaceful resolution to 
the conflict: 
a. Call for an immediate ceasefire of hostilities to prevent further loss of life in the oPt; 
b. Call for an immediate end to Israel’s siege on Gaza; 
c. Call for Israel to immediately rescind its illegal and impossible order for Gazans to 
evacuate Northern Gaza; and 
d. Immediately suspend and / or revoke all extant licences to Israel and undertake not to 
grant any further licences until Israel ceases to violate international law.