Palestine Sets Precedent with Legal Complaint

Attention has been focused on the state of Palestine’s recent submission of a “referral” to the International Criminal Court (ICC), alleging that Israeli officials committed war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Palestinian people. However, another complaint recently submitted by the state of Palestine has received much less attention, although its findings will be important in building the factual and legal basis for prosecutions against Israeli officials who may face charges before the ICC and other fora – as well as against the state of Israel itself should an advisory opinion be sought at the International Court of Justice.1

The Significance of Palestine’s CERD Filing

In April, Palestine submitted a legal complaint with the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) involving serious violations of the rights of the Palestinian people. Like the ICC referral, it specifically alleges war crimes and crimes against humanity. Yet the CERD filing is noteworthy for three additional reasons: The “state of Palestine” is the complainant; the case is being brought against the state of Israel, not an individual; and the process allows for international legal experts entrusted with eradicating racism, racial segregation, and apartheid to make a determination about Israeli practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) that will be deemed authoritative by international bodies such as the ICC and the ICJ.

The filing is also groundbreaking because the complaint is the first of its kind. Never before has one state utilized the mechanism to complain about the human rights violations of another state. If the complaint process moves forward and an ad hoc panel of CERD experts is called on to issue findings, this will reaffirm Palestinian statehood and that the OPT is the territorial unit of Palestinian sovereignty. With the Israeli Knesset considering the annexation of some or all of the West Bank and the US State Department removing references to the West Bank and Gaza as occupied territory from its country reports, having an international legal body reaffirm that Palestine has legal character as a state underscores the Palestinian position and the illegality of Israel’s conduct in the OPT.  

Never before has a state utilized the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to complain about the human rights violations of another state Share on X

Further, there has never been a legal case brought before an international forum adjudicating human rights matters or international criminal responsibility that involves the states of Palestine and Israel as opposing parties. Existing international judicial mechanisms are not available to Palestine for complaints against Israel for such rights violations. The ICJ is not empowered to hear contested cases unless both states consent to its jurisdiction. As for the ICC, it only hears cases brought against individuals.

Finally, unlike the UN General Assembly or the UN Security Council, which are political bodies made up of states, CERD is a “treaty-body” created under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and is made up of international legal experts on racism and discrimination. The anti-racism convention that CERD is mandated to uphold is considered one of the core human rights instruments. Both Palestine (in 2014) and Israel (in 1979) have ratified the convention, requiring them both to respect the principle of equality before the law and to eradicate distinctions based on race, color, or national or ethnic origin and all practices of racial segregation and apartheid, including those occurring in any territories under their jurisdiction.

Pursue the ICC but Zero In on the CERD

Palestine’s recent referral to the ICC is significant and has raised expectations for possible criminal accountability against Israeli civilian and military officials for human rights violations committed in the OPT. This is the first time Palestine has requested that the ICC open an investigation, although it had previously provided documentation to the ICC for its “preliminary examination” into acts committed by Israel since Operation Cast Lead in 2014 – an examination that has moved at a snail’s pace and has not resulted in the formal opening of an investigation.

Other international fora frequently rely on the factual findings and legal conclusions of UN treaty bodies like CERD Share on X

The referral to the ICC includes violations during the suppression of the protests in Gaza known as the Great Return March, Israel’s settlement policy in the OPT, including East Jerusalem, and the ongoing violence against Palestinians in furtherance of Israel’s territorial expansion. The Palestinian referral will have serious ramifications for the future of Palestinian-Israeli relations and peace efforts, and will trigger US laws that require the suspension of aid to the Palestinian Authority and the closure of the PLO representative office in Washington, DC.

Yet the importance of Palestine’s CERD complaint cannot be overstated. Other international fora frequently rely on the factual findings and legal conclusions of UN treaty bodies like CERD. A notable example is the ICJ’s advisory opinion on the legality of the construction of Israel’s wall of separation in the OPT. Thus, if CERD’s findings following adjudication of Palestine’s complaint against Israel are made public, they could potentially be relied upon in any future ICJ advisory opinion – and they could be authoritative in the case now referred to the ICC to hold Israeli officials criminally responsible. This makes Palestine’s submission before the UN’s anti-racism body something to follow, particularly since one of the allegations made in the recently filed ICC referral is that Israel has established a system of apartheid inside the OPT.

  1. Al-Shabaka publishes all its content in both English and Arabic (see Arabic text here). To read this piece in French, please click here. Al-Shabaka is grateful for the efforts by human rights advocates to translate its pieces, but is not responsible for any change in meaning.
Al-Shabaka Policy Member Zaha Hassan is a human rights lawyer and visiting fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Her research focuses on Palestine-Israel...

Latest Analysis

 Politics
On Thursday, June 19, 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood in front of the aftermath of an Iranian strike near Bir al-Saba’ and told journalists: “It really reminds me of the British people during the Blitz. We are going through a Blitz.” The Blitz refers to the sustained bombing campaign carried out by Nazi Germany against the UK, particularly London, between September 1940 and May 1941. With this dramatic comparison, Netanyahu sought to elicit Western sympathy and secure unconditional support for his government’s latest act of military escalation and violation of international law: the unprovoked bombing of Iran. This rhetorical move is far from new; it has become an enduring trope in Israeli political discourse—one that casts Israel as the perennial victim and frames its opponents as modern-day Nazis. Netanyahu has long harbored ambitions of striking Iran with direct US support, but timing has always been central. This moment, then, should not be viewed merely as opportunistic aggression, but as part of a broader, calculated strategy. His actions are shaped by a convergence of unprecedented impunity, shifting regional dynamics, and deepening domestic political fragility. This commentary examines the latest escalation in that context and discusses the broader political forces driving it.
Al-Shabaka Yara Hawari
Yara Hawari· Jun 26, 2025
 Politics
Launched on May 26, 2025, and secured by US private contractors, the new Israeli-backed aid distribution system in Gaza has resulted in over 100 Palestinian deaths, as civilians navigated dangerous conditions at hubs positioned near military outposts along the Rafah border. These fatalities raise grave concerns about the safety of the aid model and the role of US contractors operating under Israeli oversight. This policy memo argues that the privatization of aid and security in Gaza violates humanitarian norms by turning aid into a tool of control, ethnic cleansing, and colonization. It threatens Palestinian life by conditioning life-saving aid, facilitating forced displacement, and shielding the Israeli regime from legal and moral responsibility. It additionally erodes local and international institutions, especially UNRWA, which has been working in Gaza for decades.
الشبكة جودة
Safa Joudeh· Jun 10, 2025
 Civil Society
In this policy lab, Mariam Barghouti and Sharif Abdel Kouddous join host Tariq Kenney-Shawa to discuss Israel’s targeted assassination campaign against Palestinian journalists, the complicity of Western media in normalizing these crimes, and how this silence allows Israel to get away with genocide.
Al-Shabaka Mariam Barghouti
Mariam Barghouti· May 28, 2025
Skip to content