ICHR Co-organizes Human Rights Council Event on Economic Responsibility of Third States in Relation to Israeli Occupation and Genocide

 

Geneva, 2 July 2025 - The Independent Commission for Human Rights, in collaboration with Law for Palestine and Human Rights Watch, co-organized a side event during the 59th session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. The discussion focused on the economic responsibility of third states in relation to the Israeli occupation and genocide in the occupied Palestinian territory.

The panel featured Anisha Patel, member of the Law for Palestine Governing Council; Wesam Ahmed, Head of the Center for Applied International Law at Al-Haq; Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967; and Daan de Grefte, Senior Legal Officer at the European Legal Support Center. The discussion was moderated by Dr. Ammar Dweik, Director General of the Independent Commission for Human Rights.

The event was attended by representatives from several UN member states, including Switzerland, Portugal, Norway, Belgium, Canada, Singapore, Venezuela, the Maldives, the Netherlands, Panama, Türkiye, Lebanon, Germany, Ireland, and Austria, along with civil society representatives and international law experts.

Speakers discussed the legal obligations of third states and private actors under international law and emphasized the role of economic structures in sustaining systems of occupation, apartheid, and impunity.

 

Opening Remarks: Dr. Ammar Dweik

Dr. Dweik opened the discussion by asserting that the defense of human rights cannot be separated from the broader systems -economic, legal, and political- that enable their violation. He argued that the ongoing human rights crisis in Palestine is not solely the result of military action but is rooted in a sustained system of structural violence, enabled by both state and non-state actors. This includes third states and private corporations that continue to support Israeli policies through economic, military, and diplomatic means.

Dweik referenced the recently published report by UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, titled “From Economy of Occupation to Economy of Genocide”, which concludes that private companies operating in conflict zones cannot shield themselves by claiming neutrality. The report, he noted, helps reframe the conversation on accountability to include economic complicity.

 

Anisha Patel: Third States’ Legal Duties under International Law

Anisha Patel highlighted the responsibilities of states under international law, particularly in light of the ICJ's 2024 Advisory Opinion, and its finding that Israel may plausibly be committing genocide. She stressed that states must not only hold their own institutions accountable but also regulate the conduct of corporations and individuals under their jurisdiction, including those operating abroad.

She outlined three core duties reaffirmed by the ICJ: first, the positive obligation to end Israel’s illegal presence in the occupied Palestinian territory (including through targeted sanctions); second, the negative duty not to recognize or support the occupation, particularly through economic engagement; and third, the obligation not to aid or assist in maintaining the unlawful situation.

Patel concluded that economic relations -both public and private- are instrumental in sustaining Israeli violations. As such, they must be suspended in accordance with states’ obligations under international law.

 

Wesam Ahmed: Colonial Continuity and Corporate Impunity

Wesam Ahmed placed the current situation in a broader historical context, describing Israel’s colonization of Palestine as a continuation of settler-colonial practices, increasingly sustained through private sector involvement. Citing a 1925 Zionist document that debated whether colonization should be philanthropic or profit-driven, he argued that economic motivations have always been deeply embedded in the Zionist project.

He noted that after the 1967 occupation, the entrenchment of Israeli control became more strategically aligned with economic mechanisms. Ahmed praised Albanese’s report for shedding light on the structural nature of this economic entanglement and for helping expose the machinery that enables ongoing violations.

Ahmed also addressed the persistent gap in international law concerning corporate actors, who are often not held to the same legal standards as states. He pointed to the lack of meaningful progress on establishing a binding treaty through the UN intergovernmental working group on business and human rights. At the domestic level, he identified legal barriers such as prosecutorial discretion and international comity in civil litigation as key obstacles to accountability. He concluded by asking, “We know it can be done, but where is the political will to do so?” and emphasized that both international and domestic legal reforms, alongside grassroots mobilization, are essential to achieving justice.

Francesca Albanese: A Moment of Reckoning for International Law

Francesca Albanese framed her intervention as a critical moment of reckoning for the international community. She questioned the credibility of institutions such as the United Nations, challenging their relevance if they are unable to prevent or halt the atrocities unfolding in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. Albanese warned that the meaning of international law and humanitarian principles is at stake if they are not applied universally and without bias.

Describing the situation in Gaza as a “death trap,” she criticized so-called humanitarian corridors as part of a joint criminal enterprise that further entrenches harm rather than alleviating it. She argued that the case of Palestine exposes the deeper structural failures of the international system, and called for the courage to dismantle the frameworks that have enabled prolonged injustice.

Albanese emphasized that the system of occupation is sustained not only by states but also by a network of private actors -businesses, universities, banks, pension funds, and charities- that have historically profited from what she termed the twin economic pillars of displacement and replacement. Given the ICJ’s finding that Israel may plausibly be committing genocide, the calls for dismantling the occupation, and ongoing proceedings at the International Criminal Court, she stressed that corporate actors can no longer hide behind claims of neutrality or ignorance. Those enabling, facilitating, or profiting from crimes must be held accountable.

She concluded by reminding the audience that individual choices carry weight -from the products we buy to the services we use. Albanese described her recent report as a wake-up call and urged immediate action before the damage becomes irreversible.

 

Daan de Grefte: Civil Society’s Role in Making Complicity Economically and Legally Untenable

Closing the panel, Daan de Grefte emphasized the urgent responsibility of civil society in confronting the economic underpinnings of Israel’s ongoing violations in Palestine. Echoing earlier speakers, he asserted that the role of private actors in sustaining occupation and enabling international crimes is no longer in question, nor are the legal duties of third states to respond. Yet, despite these clear obligations, powerful states -many of which host complicit economic actors- continue to avoid meaningful action.

In the face of this inaction, de Grefte argued that civil society must act decisively to make Zionism, apartheid, and genocide untenable as economic systems. This, he said, requires the comprehensive isolation of Israel -economically, politically, and militarily- to deprive it of the means to commit further atrocities.

He underscored the importance of centering Palestinian leadership in the struggle for liberation and called for the escalation of civil disobedience. Legal strategies, he noted, should not stand alone but must complement grassroots action. Civil society must work in close coordination with Palestinian organizations to align legal and advocacy strategies, leveraging the momentum generated by the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion, the genocide proceedings, and recent ICC arrest warrants.

De Grefte also encouraged the use of creative legal tools -including anti-money laundering laws- to disrupt financial flows connected to settlement enterprises and other violations of international law. He highlighted the work of the European Legal Support Center in holding accountable companies that profit from the genocide. While the legal route is crucial, he concluded, it is only the beginning of a much larger and longer struggle for justice.

 

Conclusion: Accountability Must Extend Beyond the State

This event underscored that accountability for Israel’s ongoing violations cannot stop at the state level. As the speakers emphasized, it must also encompass the corporations and third states that enable and profit from them. With mounting legal momentum from the ICJ and ICC, the responsibility now lies with states, institutions, and individuals to confront the economic structures sustaining apartheid, occupation, and genocide.

The message from the panel was unequivocal: the time for half-measures has passed. Real change will only come through collective pressure, coordinated legal action, and the moral courage to challenge complicity in all its forms.