BDS is a sinister hoax with genocidal objective

(iv) Occupation law did not prohibit Israel from making use of real property but Israel's role was restricted to that of a caretaker that must restore such property to the "occupied power" once the conflict has ended. Significantly Ms Nyusten failed to identify that the "occupied power" was Jordan  whose annexation of the West Bank in 1950 was declared illegal by every country except Great Britain and Pakistan.

(v) The issue of whether Israel was entitled to open new quarries which did not exist before 1967 was "controversial".

(vi) The 1995 Oslo Accords (Oslo II) "presume" the ultimate transfer of Area C from Israeli to Palestinian control through so-called final status negotiations. Ms Nyusten however did not point to any provision in the Oslo Accords that supports this "presumption".

Ms Nyusten's legal opinion also failed to consider two territory-specific provisions in international law sanctioning the right of Jews to live in the West Bank for the purposes of reconstituting the Jewish National Home there: article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

In the end KPL, faced with no definitive international law to justify its decision to disinvest, concluded:

that the ethical arguments carry the heaviest weight in this case.

Ethics are not law.

EU decisions supposedly based on judicially determined principles of international law were exposed as myths that can no longer be legally or politically sustained.

The BDS hoax is set to swallow many more well-intended people into its Jew-hating vortex.

The EU could suffer a similar fate with the introduction of its labelling policies – no longer being able to rely on non-existent international law to camouflage that decision – whilst opening itself to the charge it is supporting a genocidal campaign designed to dismantle the Jewish State.

Common sense will hopefully prevail.