41 Winter 2025 Professor Geoffrey Watson, a leading commentor on the Oslo Accords, has argued that the Accords are legally binding on both Israel and the Palestinians: “Most of the Accords have the formal attributes of binding instruments; they are styled ‘agreements’ and ‘protocols,’ they are structured like treaties, and they contain mandatory rather than permissive language . . . It appears, then, that the Oslo Accords are legally binding international agreements.”9 In sum, because both parties had the legal capacity to enter into the Oslo Accords, and because the Accords constituted a valid and legally binding international agreement between the parties, Israel and the PLO, now the Palestinian Authority, were required by law to comply with the Accords at the time they took effect. The Oslo Accords Remain Legally Binding Today The Preamble to the Oslo II Agreement proclaims, “the peace process and the new era that it has created, as well as the new relationship established between the two Parties as described above, are irreversible.” Nevertheless, both parties have occasionally accused each other of breaching the Accords. The alleged breaches arguably could give rise to a claim by either party under Article 60(1) of the Vienna Convention to terminate or suspend the Oslo Accords in part or in full based on a “material breach” by the other party. Article 60(3) defines “material breach” as “(a) a repudiation of the treaty not sanctioned by the present Convention; or (b) the violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty.” Significantly, however, neither side has invoked Article 60 or otherwise abrogated the Oslo Accords as of the present date. Notwithstanding Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s recent public criticism of the Oslo Accords (which he negotiated on behalf of the PLO), “the Protocol Concerning Legal Affairs remains applicable and Israeli nationals continue to be immune from prosecution in Palestinian courts, even for crimes committed on Palestinian territory.”10 Moreover, “[s]ince neither side has to date renounced the Oslo Accords and succeeding instruments, they remain in effect.”11 Indeed, despite the respective claims of breach, both Israel and the Palestinian Authority continue to fulfil the Oslo Accords on a daily basis in the West Bank. For example, notwithstanding recent pronouncements to the contrary, the reality on the ground is that the Palestinian Authority maintains security cooperation with Israel based on the Oslo framework.12 Moreover, both sides continue abiding by the allocation of governance and authority over Areas A, B and C of the West Bank, including the jurisdictional provisions. Nevertheless, even if one or both parties were to invoke Article 60(1) of the Vienna Convention and suspend or terminate the Oslo Accords now, Article 70 of the Convention provides that it would not affect Israel’s rights “created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination,” such as the Palestinian waiver of criminal jurisdiction over Israeli nationals in the Oslo II Agreement, more fully discussed below.13 Therefore, the Oslo Accords remain legally binding as to the ICC’s issuance of the arrest warrants. Palestine Could Not Delegate Jurisdiction Over Israeli Nationals to the Court The decision to issue the arrest warrants is devoid of any serious discussion regarding the Court’s jurisdiction. On February 5, 2021, in its majority ruling on territorial jurisdiction in the Situation in Palestine, Pre-Trial Chamber I found that the Court’s territorial jurisdiction in the Situation extends to the “territories occupied by 9. Watson, supra note 7, at 101-02. 10. Monique Cormier, THE JURISDICTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT OVER NATIONALS OF NON-STATES PARTIES 111 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2020). 11. Malcolm Shaw, INTERNATIONAL LAW 216 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 9th ed. 2021). Arab commentators view Abbas’s statements (in response to the Abraham Accords) proclaiming the “end of Israeli-Palestinian agreements” as merely symbolic and made for domestic consumption, with no substantive steps taken and no legal impact; see also Khalil E. Jahshan, Yousef Munayyer, Jonathan Kuttab, and Imad K. Harb, “Abbas’s Declaration: The Oslo Accords are Now Dead and Buried,” ARAB CENTER, Washington DC (May 20, 2020), available at https:// arabcenterdc.org/resource/abbass-declaration-the-osloaccords-are-now-dead-and-buried/ 12. Ariel Oseran, “Analysis: Israeli-Palestinian Security Coordination Continues in West Bank, Despite Tensions,” I24 NEWS (Feb. 26, 2023), available at https://www. i24news.tv/en/news/israel/defense/1677263977-analysisisraeli-palestinian-security-coordination-continues-inwest-bank 13. Eyal Benvenisti, “The Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles: A Framework for Future Settlement,” 4 EUR. J. INT’L. L. 542, 545 (1993) (analyzing the 1993 Declaration of Principles, but equally applicable to the Oslo II Agreement).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=