Ms Natasha Hausdorff:

It is important that we start by stating clearly that whatever legal position the committee members adhere to in terms of the application of international law, these are clearly territories administered by Israel. Therefore, the boycott necessarily is targeting the goods produced and regulated under the State of Israel. That is clear as to how the EU has treated the export of goods from the disputed territories and from Israel and the distinctions it has drawn between them.

As to the application of international law, it is by no means accepted, from my part, that the non-application of uti possidetis juris here ought to be endorsed. In fact, this application of the term "illegal settlements" is more a political categorisation than a legal one. Yes, the ICJ advisory opinion has adopted it, and in that respect we need to be clear about the paragraph of the advisory opinion that has been oft-quoted in the committee sessions, paragraph 278, upon which this Bill has now been justified. This is what I referred to in my opening remarks because it does not change the position in any way. It is not a legally binding opinion. It has to be considered that where the court has been so resoundingly critical------