Palestine in the ICC

Abstract

Abstract This article examines two propositions relating to the role of the right to self-determination with regard to statehood, as put forward by the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in its a request pursuant to Article 19(3) of the ICC Statute, for a ruling on the Court’s territorial jurisdiction in Palestine. One proposition is that the right to self-determination can compensate for a shortfall in effective control that might otherwise bar recognition of the territory as a state. The other proposition is that when effective control is lacking because of illegal obstruction of the realization of the right to self-determination, recognition of statehood may be an appropriate response regardless of the facts. The article argues that these propositions are neither substantiated in existing law, nor can they be said to be matters of the progressive development of the law. For this, the article analyses instances where statehood was allegedly recognized prior to the consolidation of effective control and which are cited as reflecting the propositions. It shows that these instances do not support the propositions. With respect to the second proposition, the article argues that it is inadvisable as lex ferenda, nor applicable in the Palestine case.