“No Dumping Ground”: Tunisia activist Wins Award against waste scandal

The Hague: The Supreme Court of the United Nations on Friday wraps a week with hearings about what Israel has to do to ensure that urgently needed humanitarian aid achieves the Palestinians in Gaza and in occupied West Bank.
Last year, the United Nations General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on the legal obligations of Israel after the state had effectively banned the UN Agency for Palestinian refugees, the main provider of aids for Gaza.
Experts say that the case could have more comprehensive impact on the United Nations and its missions worldwide.
The hearings take place because the humanitarian aid system in Gaza is about to collapse and the armistice efforts are still coordinated. Israel has blocked the entry of food, fuel, medicine and other humanitarian aid goods since March 2. It renewed its bombing on March 18, broke a ceasefire and confiscated large parts of the territory. Hamas is intended to make more Giene released.
As part of his war, Israel deliberately contests civilians and aid employees with Hamas and did not take part in the hearing. The country has submitted a written submission of 38 pages to the court.

What is at stake?
The hearings focused on providing help for the Palestinians, but the 15 judges of the UN Court were able to use their advisory opinion in order to provide legal guidance on the powers of the world authority.
“The court has the opportunity to clarify and answer questions about the legal immunities of the United Nations,” said Mike Becker, an expert in international human rights law at Trinity College Dublin, the Associated Press.
The advice given by the UN court is called “non -binding” because the ignition is not added to any direct punishments. However, the contract that covers the protection that the federal states have to give the United Nations staff says that disputes should be enclosed by an advisory opinion with the ICJ and that the opinion “is recognized as decisive by the parties”.
“The curiosity of this specific process,” said Becker, “is a clear reaction to every argument that the opinion is not binding.”

What was the ICJ commissioned to answer?
The resolution sponsored by Norway requests the guidance of the ICJ to “Israel's commitments … in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations … to ensure and facilitate the unexpected provision of urgently needed deliveries that are essential for the survival of the Palestinian civilian population.” The United States, Israel's closest of allies, voted against it.
Israel's prohibition of the agency, known as Unrwa, which helps Gaza, came into force in January. The organization was increased by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right -wing extremist allies who claim that the group was deeply infiltrated by Hamas. Unrwa rejects this claim.
“We cannot allow states to choose where the UN will do its work. This advisory opinion is a very important opportunity to strengthen this,” said Becker.

Are these procedures important for other countries than Israel?
Whatever the judges decide, according to Juliette Mcintyre, an expert in international law at the University of South Australia, will work beyond the current situation in Gaza. “Are these immunities absolutely or is there scope? This is useful if the United Nations staff works in other places,” Mcintire told AP.
A significant response from the world court can also influence the court proceedings. “Every time a standard is violated, the standard becomes weaker. The advisory opinion in this case could push back the norm,” said Mcintyre.
In separate procedures last year, the court issued an unprecedented and comprehensive conviction of Israel's rule over the occupied Palestinian areas, found the presence of Israel illegal and demanded that it end. The ICJ said that Israel had no right to sovereignty in the territories, violated the international laws of the acquisition of territories by violence and disabled the right of Palestinians to self -determination.
According to Mcintyre, the arguments presented this week reflect the opinion handed over nine months ago. “Now the start of the start is that Israel is illegally taking in throughout Palestine,” said Mcintire.

What did the Palestinians and Israelis say?
On Monday, the Palestinian delegation accused Israel of Palestinian Delegation in the occupied areas and welcomed the step to bring more proceedings to court. “Our journey with the international institutions, be it the IT security council, the general assembly or the ICJ, build things on another block, while we march on the fulfillment of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including our right to self-determination, statehood and the right to have the refugee,” said Palestinian UN-GRONYAD-MANN Reporters.
Israel has denied that it violates international law and said the procedure was biased. The Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar disintegrated during a press conference in Jerusalem on Monday in the case. “I accuse Unrwa, I accuse the United Nations, I accuse the Secretary General and I accuse everyone who armed international law and its institutions to defend the most attacked country in the world, Israel, the most fundamental right,” he said.
The court is expected to take months to make its statement.