Israel must give Red Cross access to jailed Palestinians, Britain tells ICJ

British government lawyers have said Israel is bound by the Geneva conventions to give the International Committee of the Red Cross access to Palestinian prisoners and cannot justify its refusal to do so by pointing to Hamas’s treatment of Israeli hostages.

On the fourth day of proceedings at the International court of justice in The Hague, Sally Langrish said “there have been repeated credible reports of ill treatment of Palestinian detainees held in Israeli custody” since the 7 October 2023 attacks by Hamas on Israel.

She said the refusal of Hamas to give ICRC access to Israeli hostages seized during the attacks could not serve as justification for Israel’s actions. She added that the ICRC played a vital role in protecting and promoting the lives and dignity of the victims of arms conflict.

The UK lawyers also clashed with Israel by insisting that Unrwa, the UN’s Palestinian relief agency, should be regarded as a neutral and impartial body that the Israeli government had a duty to cooperate with to provide aid to the Palestinian people.

Langrish insisted “Israel, must facilitate full, rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian provision to the population of Gaza, including food, water and electricity, and must ensure access to medical care in accordance with international humanitarian law”.

Her submission reflected a UK government determination to stand by international law even if it caused severe political difficulties with its close ally Israel. It also exposed clear legal differences with arguments put to the court by the US the day before.

Israel has mounted a total blockade of aid into Gaza since 2 March, leading to mounting reports of desperation among its 2 million people. The ICJ has been asked by the UN general assembly to give an advisory opinion on Israel’s obligations to allow aid into Gaza, and on its duty to cooperate with UN bodies, notably Unrwa.

Israel, along with its chief legal backer the US, claims ending all cooperation with Unrwa is justified since under the Geneva conventions it is required to facilitate only the provision of aid with neutral bodies, a description it said Unrwa had forfeited because of alleged infiltration by Hamas.

More than 40 countries and bodies including the UN itself are giving oral submissions to the UN’s top court.

Dismissing Israeli claims that Unrwa was a Hamas front, Langrish said: “The United Kingdom considers that Unrwa is an impartial humanitarian organisation for the purposes of article 59 of the fourth Geneva convention. Insofar as impartiality is understood as meaning neutrality, Unrwa also satisfies that requirement.”

She said Israel was bound under article 59 as the occupying power “to facilitate the provision of food, stuff, medical supplies and clothing into the occupied Palestinian territories”.

“That obligation continues to apply for so long as part of the population is inadequately supplied. A refusal to negotiate or agree to relief schemes will constitute a violation of article 59”, she said. “This obligation is unconditional. Facilitation requires wholehearted cooperation in the rapid and scrupulous execution of these schemes. This includes the provision of transport, storage and distribution facilities.”

She also pointed out that under article 55 for Israel to meet its obligations to provide relief through a third party, such as Unrwa, “the occupying power must ensure the safety and security of that third party as far as possible”.

Israel, she argued, had only a limited right to choose the agency to distribute aid.