The Wall has been in construction since 2002, and when finished, will be 721km long. 10% of West Bank land will be physically separated by the Wall between the “Green Line” (the internationally recognised 1949 armistice line) and the Wall. Only 20% of the Wall’s route follows the “Green Line”, 80% encroaches into West Bank territory. At its deepest, the route of the Wall stretches 45% into the width of the West Bank (to incorporate the Ariel and Ma’ale Adumim settlement blocks onto the Israeli side). According to B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights NGO, 497,820 Palestinians are directly affected by the Wall, and the UN claim that more than half a million Palestinians live within 1km of the Wall.
The Wall has proven to be highly controversial and its construction has been condemned by Palestinians groups, Human Rights organisations and various International organisations, and declared illegal by the International Court of Justice. Criticisms of the wall centre on its route, stating the fact that the Wall verges deep into Palestinian territory, and as such has been accused as a land grab. The Wall’s route incorporates the major Israeli settlement blocks in the West Bank onto the Israeli side, as well as some of the West Bank’s most fertile land.
- The Wall, as a physical barrier to the movement of goods and people, stifles trade, disrupts trading patterns, cuts Palestinians from their land, prevents migrant workers from accessing Israeli labour markets and disconnects Palestinians from other areas of the West Bank. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, communities located near to the Wall “once had diverse local economies, with vibrant markets selling goods to Israeli customers, and abundant water and land resources. These communities have seen their living conditions plummet”.
- The Wall is posing a systematic challenge to Palestinian healthcare provision, as it isolates and fragments local health care networks and referral systems. Due to its current route, the Health, Development, Information and Policy institute claims that the Wall directly affects the provision of healthcare of 425,000 people. According to a Palestine Economic Policy Research Institute survey, 42% of West Bank households maintain that the Wall represented an obstacle that prevented them from accessing health services
- Delays at checkpoints hinder access to medical services, and according to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, “the number of instances where civilians were denied access – although in need of medical treatment – stretches into thousands”. Ambulance services have increasingly faced delays and an inability to access patients due to checkpoints and the Wall. Cases have been reported of childbirth and death at checkpoints, where passage through the checkpoint to access ambulance services was not granted in sufficient time. Between September 2000 and October 2004, 61 women delivered babies at checkpoints and there were 36 stillbirths.
- The building of the Separation Wall has affected an estimated 170,000 students in 320 schools, who will be on the outer side of the wall, while more than half of them will attend schools located on the inner side.
The International Court of Justice
The International court of Justice (ICJ), in its advisory opinion of the 9th July 2004 declared that the Wall was illegal on the grounds that it was being built on occupied Palestinian territory. It further ruled that that not only was the construction of the Wall on Palestinian land, including East Jerusalem, contrary to international law, but that Israel was under an obligation to cease construction of the Wall on Palestinian territory and to dismantle it, and also to compensate for damages caused by the Wall’s construction.
“…Israel …has the obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built by it in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem …[C]essation of those violations [of its international obligations] entails in practice the dismantling forthwith of those parts of the structure…The Court finds further that Israel has the obligation to make reparation for the damage caused to all the natural or legal persons concerned.”
(ICJ : para.s 141,142,151,153)
The ICJ decision also noted, whilst understanding “the assurance given by Israel that the construction of the wall does not amount to annexation and that the wall is of a temporary nature”, that the Wall could create an irreversible “fact on the ground” that would essentially be annexing Palestinian land.
“The construction of the wall and its associated regime create a ‘fait accompli’ on the ground that could well become permanent, in which case and notwithstanding the formal characterization of the wall by Israel, it would be tantamount to de facto annexation”
(ICJ : para. 121).
According to UN special rapporteur for human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, John Dugard, “It is highly arguable that this stage has now been reached. The prohibition of the annexation of territory by force is, of course, one of the most fundamental principles of international law.”
The advisory opinion also declared that all states were under an obligation not to recognise the illegal situation resulting from the Wall’s construction, and that all states that are high contracting parties to the Fourth Geneva convention were obliged to ensure that Israel complies with the provisions of that Convention. The ICJ decision confirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention applied to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and also confirmed the status of the settlements as contravening international law.
“All States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction; all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 have in addition the obligation, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention”
(ICJ : note 31, para. 163(D))