Prolonged occupation of Palestine by Israel: A violation of occupation law or an abuse of it?

Abstract In their submissions to the International Court of Justice in the context of the Policies and Practices of Israel Advisory Opinion, states assessed the legality of Israel’s prolonged occupation using various legal frameworks, including international humanitarian law. In doing so, some participants in the proceedings appear to have endorsed a doctrinal position suggesting that an occupation may become unlawful under international humanitarian law due to its prolonged character. This article demonstrates that such an interpretation of the law of occupation lacks consensus and does not fully align with the law as it currently stands. Building on this observation, and based on the language deployed by states in their most recent submissions, this article suggests an alternative argument: the protracted character of Israel’s occupation is more accurately framed as an abuse of the law of occupation, rather than a violation of this regime.