Latest news with #AlHaq
Al Jazeera
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
UK 'prioritising' military contracts over Palestinian lives
UK "prioritising' military contracts over Palestinian lives Quotable Jennine Walker from Global Legal Action Network talks about the court case put forward by Palestinian rights group Al-Haq to stop the UK supplying parts to the Israeli air force. Video Duration 01 minutes 06 seconds 01:06 Video Duration 01 minutes 01 seconds 01:01 Video Duration 01 minutes 06 seconds 01:06 Video Duration 01 minutes 13 seconds 01:13 Video Duration 00 minutes 56 seconds 00:56 Video Duration 01 minutes 04 seconds 01:04 Video Duration 01 minutes 29 seconds 01:29
The Guardian
30-06-2025
- Politics
- 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 has ruled. The ruling after more than 20 months of litigation will be a relief to ministers who feared that if the court declared the UK sale of F-35 parts illegal, British involvement in the highly lucrative Lockheed Martin F-35 consortium would be put at risk. In a 72-page comprehensive ruling Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn said they had rejected all the grounds of challenge to a Labour government decision in September to suspend 30 arms export licences to Israel but to continue to sell F-35 parts to Israel via a global supply pool. The government argued that disruption to the F-35 supply chain would weaken the west and Nato at an acutely sensitive moment. The UK provides about 16% of the parts for the F-35s, and the court was told in closed session that the Lockheed Martin global pool was not structured to permit the UK to insist its parts were withheld from Israel F-35s. The judges ruled that the 'acutely sensitive and political issue' was 'a matter for the executive which is democratically accountable to parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts'. The case had been brought by the Palestinian human rights group Al-Haq and Global Legal Action Network (Glan), supported by Human Rights Watch, Oxfam and Amnesty International. The judges said: 'The 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 IHL [international humanitarian law] in the conflict in Gaza.' The court rejected all 13 grounds for complaint mounted by Al-Haq's lawyers, and in so doing moved to protect ministers from judicial review based on their international law obligations. Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) called the judgment cowardly, after the court determined that it had no clear jurisdiction to rule on UK compliance with international law obligations if the law was not incorporated into UK law. Despite the ruling, the case has revealed serious weaknesses of the UK arms export regime and the case ministers have mounted in parliament to justify F-35 sales. In parliament ministers have held that it is only for a competent international court, and not politicians, to assess the existence of a genocide. But in pleadings in court, lawyers revealed that in July 2024 the government had assessed there was no serious risk of a genocide occurring in Gaza, and claimed not to have seen evidence that women and children were deliberately targeted in Gaza. The case also revealed that in assessing whether the Israeli Defense Forces had acted disproportionately, one of the key tests of a breach of IHL, the government evidential requirements were set impossibly high. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion By September 2024, when Israel, according to the Hamas-controlled health ministry, had killed 40,000 Palestinians and launched over tens of thousands of airstrikes on Gaza, the government had examined just 413 of these individual incidents – and of those it found only one possible violation of international law. That possible breach was the World Central Kitchen attack on 1 April 2024 that killed seven foreign aid workers. This means the government had not found any possible breach of IHL in respect of any incident that killed exclusively Palestinians. Al-Haq argued in court that ministers should not have focused solely on the potential Israeli justifications for a specific bombings, but also looked at the overall pattern to gather a sense of proportionality. Dearbhla Minogue, a senior lawyer at Glan, said: 'The judges declined to review the defendant's genocide assessment on grounds that it is not an area suited to the court. This should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the government, but rather a restrained approach to the separation of powers.' Sara Husseini, of the British Palestinian Committee, said: 'Now the courts have kicked the issue back to the ministers, it is a matter for MPs and the electorate to hold the government to account.' Yasmine Ahmed, the UK director of Human Rights Watch, said: 'Judicial deference to the executive in this case has left the Palestinians in Gaza without access to the protections of international law, despite the government and the court acknowledging that there is a serious risk that UK equipment might be used to facilitate or carry out atrocities against them. The atrocities we are witnessing in Gaza are precisely because governments don't think the rules should apply to them.'
Irish Times
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
UK court rejects case against lawfulness of Britain exporting fighter jet parts to Israel
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 UK had assessed that Israel was not committed to complying with international humanitarian law in Israel's military campaign. But Britain did not suspend licences for F-35 components, which go into a pool of spare parts which Israel can use on its existing F-35 jets. READ MORE Britain said suspending those licences would disrupt a global programme that supplies parts for the aircraft, with a knock-on impact on international security. It said taking such action could 'undermine US confidence in the UK and Nato'. Al-Haq had 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. Judges Stephen Males and Karen Steyn said the case was about whether the court could rule that Britain must withdraw from the international F-35 programme, which was 'a matter for the executive . . . not for the courts'. According to Gaza officials, Israel's bombardment has killed more than 56,000 Palestinians while displacing almost the whole population of more than two million and plunging the enclave into a humanitarian crisis. Israel launched its campaign in response to the October 2023 attack in which Hamas-led fighters killed 1,200 people and took 251 hostages. The court said Britain's business minister Jonathan Reynolds was 'faced with the blunt choice of accepting the F-35 carve-out or withdrawing from the F-35 programme and accepting all the defence and diplomatic consequences which would ensue'. Al-Haq said it was disappointed with the ruling, but that its legal challenge had contributed to Britain's partial suspension of arms export licences in 2024. Jennine Walker, a lawyer at the Global Legal Action Network which supported Al-Haq's case, said outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London: 'We are currently analysing the judgment for grounds of appeal. 'This is a regrettable setback after such a long battle for Al-Haq and all the Palestinians who have been following the case. However, this is not the end.' Charity Oxfam, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch also criticised the ruling. A British government spokesperson said: 'This [ruling] shows that the UK operates one of the most robust export control regimes in the world. We will continue to keep our defence export licensing under careful and continual review.' – Reuters (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025
CTV News
30-06-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Judges rule against Palestinian human rights group's claim that the U.K. is illegally arming Israel
Relatives of Palestinians killed in Israeli strikes on the Gaza Strip mourn their deaths at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, Saturday, June 28, 2025. (AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi) LONDON — A Palestinian human rights group lost its legal challenge on Monday to the British government's decision to supply Israel with parts for F-35 fighter jets and other military equipment. Al-Haq alleged that the U.K. broke domestic and international law and was complicit in atrocities against Palestinians by allowing essential components for the warplanes to be supplied to Israel. The government said the ruling showed it had rigorous export rules and it would continue to review its licensing agreements, a spokesperson said. The government last year suspended about 30 of 350 existing export licenses for equipment deemed to be for use in the conflict in Gaza because of a 'clear risk' the items could be used to violate international humanitarian law. Equipment included parts for helicopters and drones. But an exemption was made for some licenses related to components of F-35 fighter jets, which are indirectly supplied to Israel through the global spare parts supply chain and have been linked to bombing the Gaza Strip. While Al-Haq argued the U.K. shouldn't continue to export parts through what they called a 'deliberate loophole' given the government's own assessment of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law, the government said the parts were distributed to a collaboration involving the U.S. and six other partners to produce the jets. Components manufactured in the U.K. are sent to assembly lines in the U.S., Italy and Japan that supply partners -- including Israel -- with jets and spare parts, the court said. Two High Court judges ruled that the issue was one of national security because the parts were considered vital to the defense collaboration and the U.K.'s security and international peace. They said it wasn't up to the courts to tell the government to withdraw from the group because of the possibility the parts would be supplied to Israel and used to violate international humanitarian law 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,' Justices Stephen Males and Karen Steyn wrote in a 72-page judgment. Al-Haq and the groups that supported it, including U.K.-based Global Legal Action Network, Amnesty International and Oxfam, described the ruling as a disappointing setback, but said they had already made significant gains in getting the government to suspend some arms exports to Israel and they vowed to continue pressing their case. 'Despite the outcome of today, this case has centered the voice of the Palestinian people and has rallied significant public support, and it is just the start,' said Shawan Jabarin, general director of Al-Haq. 'We continue on all fronts in our work to defend our collective human values and work towards achieving justice for the Palestinians.' Compared with major arms suppliers such as the U.S. and Germany, British firms sell a relatively small amount of weapons and components to Israel. The Campaign Against Arms Trade nonprofit group estimates that the U.K. supplies about 15 per cent of the components in the F-35 stealth combat aircraft, including its laser targeting system. Brian Melley, The Associated Press
New York Times
30-06-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Nonprofits Lose Legal Bid to Halt U.K. Exports of Fighter Jet Parts to Israel
A group of nonprofits have lost a legal battle to prevent Britain exporting fighter jet parts to Israel, after judges on Monday said the issue should be decided by the government rather than the courts. Britain partly suspended arms sales to Israel in September last year, with the government halting 30 of 350 active licenses, after a review found the weapons and equipment 'might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law.' But it maintained licenses for items the British government said were not being used in the Gaza war, as well as for components for a multinational program to produce and maintain F-35 combat aircraft used by Israel and other nations. The government said that program was 'integral to international security.' Al-Haq, a Palestinian rights group based in the West Bank, and the London-based Global Legal Action Network, which campaigns on human rights and environmental issues, filed a legal challenge against the continued export of F-35 parts. They were supported by Amnesty International, Oxfam and Human Rights Watch. During a four-day hearing at the High Court of England and Wales last month, lawyers representing the charities argued that the supply of F-35 components to Israel breached Britain's duty to ensure respect for the Geneva Conventions, to prevent genocide, and to stop the sale of arms that could be used to attack civilians. But the High Court, in its judgment on Monday, said it did not have the power to rule on whether Israel's conduct in Gaza amounted to genocide or war crimes, and that decisions on whether to continue involvement in the F-35 program were for government ministers. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
