Reply: Online Edition

About “Reply”

Even the most sacred precepts of international law can be manipulated to pervert the truth. In its Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004, the UN’s International Court of Justice ruled that Israel's security fence to protect civilian populations from barbarous terror was in violation of international law.

The ICJ ruled that the inconvenience of the fence for Palestinians was more serious than the lives of Jewish children systematically murdered by Palestinian terrorists.

An informed “Reply” to this jurisprudential mockery by the World Court has been prepared by Eli Hertz of New York City. Not a lawyer, Hertz applied his considerable intellectual talents to a meticulously researched and academically refined rejoinder - one that should be read not only by the members of the Court and other UN officials, but also by the broader community of international law scholars.

Eli Hertz has prepared an important and valuable document for all who would seek justice and fairness in our corrupted legal universe. It deserves a wide and very careful reading.

Louis Rene Beres
(Ph.D., Princeton University, 1971, International Law)
Professor of International Law, Purdue University

The ICJ advisory opinion on Israel’s security fence was a legal travesty denying the people of Israel their inherent right to self-defense and, at the same time, ignoring their historical national rights that the UN and the League of Nations once readily recognized. Eli Hertz has done an enormous service by providing a cogent point-by-point rebuttal and, by doing so, not letting this terrible document stand without a reply.

Ambassador Dore Gold
Former Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations

This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box at

Top ↑ Powered by Remote IT