Halt unilateral Palestinian statehood

Int'l group of some 60 lawyers say UN resolution on statehood would be a violation of all past agreements between Israel, the Palestinians.

An international group of some 60 attorneys, including former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker, has appealed to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to prevent a General Assembly resolution on unilateral Palestinian statehood, based on the pre-1967 lines.

In a letter dated Wednesday, the attorneys noted that such a resolution would be a violation of all past agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. They added that it would also contravene UN resolutions 242 and 338.

Breaking News 02:40 US jury convicts JFK airport bomb p_

Photo by: REUTERS/ Joshua Lott

Attorneys to Ban: Halt unilateral Palestinian statehood

By TOVAH LAZAROFF
05/27/2011 04:35

Int'l group of some 60 lawyers say UN resolution on statehood would be a violation of all past agreements between Israel, the Palestinians.

An international group of some 60 attorneys, including former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker, has appealed to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to prevent a General Assembly resolution on unilateral Palestinian statehood, based on the pre-1967 lines.

In a letter dated Wednesday, the attorneys noted that such a resolution would be a violation of all past agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. They added that it would also contravene UN resolutions 242 and 338.



According to the attorneys, the legal basis for the establishment of the state by the League of Nations in 1922 affirmed its presence on territories that included Judea, Samaria, and what is now east Jerusalem.

“This was subsequently affirmed by both houses of US Congress,” the attorneys stated.

According to Article 80 of the UN Charter, the attorneys said, rights granted to all states or people by already existing international instruments – including those adopted by the League of Nations – remain valid.

As a result, the attorneys said, the “650,000 Jews [who] presently reside in the areas of Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, reside there legitimately.”

The 1949 Armistice Agreement stated that these lines “are without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines, or to claims of either Party relating thereto,” the attorneys said. Therefore, they said, “the 1967 borders” do not exist, and have never existed.

Past resolutions have called for a negotiated solution to the conflict, the attorneys affirmed.

Additionally, attempts to unilaterally change the status of the territory would be a breach of the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the attorneys said.

When the Palestinians agreed to the Oslo Accords, they knew that the settlements existed and would be one of the issues that would be negotiated during talks for a permanent-status arrangement, the attorneys said.

The Olso Accords did not limit settlement activity, they added. Subscribe to our Newsletter to receive news updates directly to your email

011