Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
A Palestinian human rights group will discover on Monday whether it has won a legal challenge against the Government over decisions related to exports of military equipment to Israel amid the conflict in Gaza.
Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets.
In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict.
But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'.
The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme.
Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday.
At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'.
In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel.
F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool.
An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'.
In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'.
He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision.
Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Human rights group loses legal challenge over exports of jet parts to Israel
Al-Haq took legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets, telling a hearing in May that it was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, which are part of an international defence programme. The DBT defended the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law'. In a 72-page ruling on Monday, Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn said the case was about a 'much more focused issue' than the carve-out itself. The judges continued: 'That issue is whether it is open to the court to rule that the UK must withdraw from a specific multilateral defence collaboration which is reasonably regarded by the responsible ministers as vital to the defence of the UK and to international peace and security, because of the prospect that some UK manufactured components will or may ultimately be supplied to Israel, and may be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza. 'Under our constitution that acutely sensitive and political issue is a matter for the executive which is democratically accountable to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
UK's sale of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel is lawful, high court rules
Britain's decision to allow the export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel, despite accepting they could be used in breach of international humanitarian law in Gaza, was lawful, London's high court ruled on Monday. Al-Haq, a human rights group based in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, took legal action against Britain's Department for Business and Trade over its decision to exempt F-35 parts when it suspended some arms export licences last year. The UK had assessed that Israel was not committed to complying with international humanitarian law, in relation to humanitarian access and the treatment of detainees, as the basis for its decision. But Britain decided to 'carve out' F-35 licences, with the government saying suspending those licences would disrupt a global programme that supplies parts for the aircraft, with a knock-on impact on international security. Any such disruption would 'undermine US confidence in the UK and Nato', the Ministry of Defence said. Al-Haq argued at a hearing last month that the decision was unlawful as it was in breach of Britain's obligations under international law, including the Geneva conventions. But the high court dismissed the group's challenge in a written ruling. More details soon …
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
UK export of F-35 parts to Israel was lawful, court rules
LONDON, June 30 (Reuters) - Britain's decision to allow the export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel, despite accepting they could be used in breach of international humanitarian law in Gaza, was lawful, London's High Court ruled on Monday. Al-Haq, a group based in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, had taken legal action against Britain's Department for Business and Trade over its decision to exempt F-35 parts when it suspended some arms export licences last year. The United Kingdom had assessed that Israel was not committed to complying with international humanitarian law, in relation to humanitarian access and the treatment of detainees, as the basis for its decision. But Britain decided to "carve out" F-35 licences, with the government saying suspending those licences would disrupt a global programme that supplies parts for the aircraft, with a knock-on impact on international security. Any such disruption would "undermine U.S. confidence in the UK and NATO", the Ministry of Defence said. Al-Haq argued at a hearing last month that the decision was unlawful as it was in breach of Britain's obligations under international law, including the Geneva Convention. But the High Court dismissed the group's challenge in a written ruling.
