As we're noted many times, the opinion by the World Court in 2004 with regards to the Israeli security barrier was just that, an opinion, entirely advisory and non-binding as per the court's own published charter:Some 500,000 Israelis and 2.5 million Palestinians live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, areas Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 war.
Palestinians fear settlements, which the World Court has deemed illegal, will deny them a viable state. They say construction in settlements must stop before peace talks, frozen some three weeks after they began in September, can resume.
Thus does Reuters, which is deeply hostile to Jewish nationalism and legal rights, spuriously cite a wholly irrelevant body and its opinion rather than the only resolution of genuine standing on the matter.It is of the essence of such opinions that they are advisory, i.e., that, unlike the Court’s judgments, they have no binding effect.
A continuing and grave violation of the Reuters Trust Principles and code of ethics.