...Largely Forgotten 2013 French Court Ruling That Settlements Are Legal Receives Renewed Attention

[Mosby]

Following Paris Peace Summit, Largely Forgotten 2013 French Court Ruling That Israeli Settlements Are Legal Receives Renewed Attention

A largely forgotten landmark 2013 French court ruling has received renewed attention this week following the international diplomatic summit held in Paris last Sunday at which Israeli settlements were portrayed as illegal.

In an editorial published on Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal wrote, “The conference was a failure, but the conferees could have helped themselves by first checking what French courts have to say about those settlements before scoring Israel again…In 2013 the French Court of Appeals in Versailles ruled that, contrary to Palestinian arguments, Jewish settlements don’t violate the Geneva Conventions’ prohibition against an occupying power transferring ‘its civilian population into the territory it occupies.’ The law, the court held, bars government efforts to transfer populations. But it doesn’t bar private individuals settling in the disputed territories.”

https://www.algemeiner.com/2017/01/19/following-paris-peace-summit-largely-forgotten-2013-french-court-ruling-that-israeli-settlements-are-legal-receives-renewed-attention/

An actual court decision, not just some opinion/interpretation about the applicability of Geneva 4 to the settlements.

[HassleCat]

1. So those are private bulldozers that crush Palestinian houses.

And the soldiers are private militia, I guess.

[Mosby]

3. I don't read french

But your link says:

In its ruling, the court states that “France Palestine” was not allowed to bring an action for challenging the breach of the international rule in the case. In addition the Court determined that Alstom, Alstom Transport SA and Veolia Transport was not responsible for breach of international rules, including human international rules or UN Global Compact, whilst performing their contract for the construction of the tramway of Jerusalem.

So the court said that the building of the transports did not violate international law.