Palestine – Anti-Israel Security Council Resolution 2334 Violates UN Charter

January 6, 2017 by David Singer
Read on for article

United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 violates article 80 of the United Nations Charter and accordingly is illegal in international law…writes David Singer.Any attempt by the Security Council to enforce Resolution 2334 or to pass any new Resolutions based on Resolution 2334 will also be illegal.

Article 80 preserves the legal rights vested in the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home within 22% of the territory comprised in the 1922 Mandate for Palestine (“Mandate”). That territory includes what is known today as Area “C” located in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem (“disputed areas”).

Resolution 2334 seeks to erase and annul – not preserve – those vested Jewish legal rights in the disputed areas by:

  1. Claiming that Jews now presently living – or seeking in the future to live – in the disputed areas constitutes “a flagrant violation under international law”  – when in fact their right to live there is sanctioned by Article 6 of the Mandate and Article 80.
  2. Alleging that the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in the disputed areas requires the consent of any other party.
  3. Calling on all States to discriminate between Jews living in the disputed areas and Jews living in Israel.
  4. Discouraging Jews from living in the disputed areas when article 6 of the Mandate specifically encourages close Jewish settlement in the disputed areas.

The questionable legality of Resolution 2334 needs to be urgently resolved by the Security Council itself seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) under article 96(a) of the United Nations Charter.

The General Assembly so acted when it sought an advisory opinion in 2003 from the ICJ on the legality of the security barrier erected by Israel.

That decision was fundamentally flawed because contrary to Article 65 (2) of the ICJ Statute – two vital documents – the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 – were not included in the dossier of documents submitted to the ICJ for consideration by then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan – an omission never explained until today.

Give the ICJ half the documents and you will only get half a judgement.

Indeed the Egyptian Judge sitting on that case – Justice El Araby – cautioned in his judgement:

The international legal status of the Palestinian Territory (paras. 70-71 of the Advisory Opinion), in my view, merits more comprehensive treatment. A historical survey is relevant to the question posed by the General Assembly, for it serves as the background to understanding the legal status of the Palestinian Territory on the one hand and underlines the special and continuing responsibility of the General Assembly on the other. This may appear as academic, without relevance to the present events. The present is however determined by the accumulation of past events and no reasonable and fair concern for the future can possibly disregard a firm grasp of past events. In particular, when on more than one occasion, the rule of law was consistently side-stepped. The point of departure, or one can say in legal jargon, the critical date, is the League of Nations Mandate which was entrusted to Great Britain.”

 The Security Council needs to ensure that this time round the Mandate and article 80 are put centre stage before the ICJ to consider when ruling on the legality of Resolution 2334. Justice for the Jewish people – and the standing, integrity and reputation of the United Nations – demands nothing less.

The Security Council cannot act in violation of the UN Charter – nor countenance any suggestion of illegality in its dealings with member States.

That is a certain recipe for absolute disaster.

David Singer is a Sydney Lawyer and Foundation Member of the International Analysts Network


5 Responses to “Palestine – Anti-Israel Security Council Resolution 2334 Violates UN Charter”
  1. Liat Kirby-Nagar says:

    You do such good work, and service to Israel and the Jewish people, by providing your analyses in fine detail, David, and reminding us of the importance of that fine detail.

    It’s only a few days ago I used your comments on Theodor Meron’s changed opinion in 1968 on the applicability of the Geneva Convention, to counter comments posted on the illegality of Israel’s settlements in Area C under the Geneva Convention.

    with much appreciation,

  2. Leon Poddebsky says:

    Certainly the ICJ’s advisory opinion was very flawed, but Israel’s acquiescence in the Oslo Accord arrangements and wording is gleefully seized upon by Israel’s Western enemies to bolster Arab claims and totally disdain Israel’s.
    Israel’s motivation was to arrive at a modus vivendi: the Arabs’ was to gratefully embrace the Trojan Horse.

    • david singer says:


      No use crying over spilt milk.

      The Arabs’ Trojan Horse is getting closer to being sent to the knackery with every passing day.

      It could have been grazing peacfully in 90% of Judea and Samaria for the last 16 years or in even larger greener pastures for the last 70 years.

      Go figure…

  3. Leon Poddebsky says:

    All true, David, but who is going to police adherence to international law that is fair to the Jewish People?

    In the real world, ulterior motives, hypocrisy and power of various kinds generally trump law and justice.

    Hence such a miscarriage of law and justice as UNSC2334 can be supported by the civilised world.
    Hence the civilised world can hand the Islamic republic of Iran a nuclear capability on a silver platter.
    Hence an eminent person who presumably knows the real facts, having served as Foreign Minister of a progressive country, can unashamedly publicly declare that Jerusalem is “a great Arab city which Israel is Judaising”, and he did this without fear of ridicule or scorn, knowing that his party and other people subscribe to his disingenuousness.
    Hence a former US president can, with the same degree of baseness, allege that Israel practises apartheid.

    • david singer says:


      We must seek justice for the Jewish people and their vested legal rights until justice is done.

      Not an easy road to travel when the hounds are baying for blood.

      But I am confident justice will prevail – as it did almost 100 years ago when the right of the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in its ancient biblical and historic homeland was recognised by the international community.

Speak Your Mind

Comments received without a full name will not be considered
Email addresses are NEVER published! All comments are moderated. J-Wire will publish considered comments by people who provide a real name and email address. Comments that are abusive, rude, defamatory or which contain offensive language will not be published

Leave a Reply to david singer Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.