English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In its recent Israeli Wall opinion, the International Court of Justice gave rather short shrift to Israel’s claims that the construction of the wall could be justified as an act of self-defence in the sense of Art. 51 UNC. This comment assesses the Court’s approach and places it in the broader context of ICJ pronouncements on the use of force. It suggests that the Court failed to appreciate the complex legal problems to which Israel’s claim gave rise, in particular the problem of self-defence against attacks by non-State actors. It shows that the Court’s restrictive understanding of self-defence, while following the 1986 merits judgment in the Nicaragua case, is difficult to bring in line with modern State practice, and increases the pressure to admit other, non-written, exceptions to Art. 2(4) UNC.

Light Treatment of a Complex Problem: The Law of Self-Defence in the Wall Case