The UK High Court has dismissed a case brought by campaigners that is trying to prevent transfer to Israel of all British-made spare parts for US-made F-35 fighter jets, saying that it does not have constitutional right to intervene.
The government suspended about 30 arms export licenses to Israel last September as due to the risk of Risk of UK-made weapons in violation of international law in Gaza Strip.
But the UK F -35 supplies components in a global pool that can use Israel. The government had argued that it does not get out of the defense program without endangering international peace.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch expressed disappointment in the ruling.
Both groups intervened in the case.
“The horrific reality in Gaza is coming out in the full scene of the world: the whole families slanted, the civilians killed in the so -called safe areas, hospitals were reduced into the debris, and the population operated in the starvation by a brutal blockade and displacement,” said the Chief Executive Officer of Amnesty International UK, Sacha Deshmukh.
“This decision does not change the facts on the ground, nor does it absorb the UK government from its responsibilities under international law.”
The two judges said that the matter was not about whether Britain should supply weapons and other military equipment to Israel – as the government had decided not to do it.
They were being asked to decide on a particular issue: UK should “withdraw with a specific multilateral defense cooperation” due to the possibility that some UK-made parts could be supplied to Israel and used in violation of international law in conflict in Gaza.
“Under our Constitution, that intense sensitive and political issue is a case for executive which is democratically accountable to Parliament and finally voters, not for the courts,” he ruled.
According to the campaign against arms trade, the UK industry makes 15% of every F -35.
Oxfam, which provided evidence to the court, said: “It is unconscious that the government will continue to license the sales of components for F -35 jets, knowing that they are used to deliberate attacks and destroy their means of surviving, including significant water supply.”
The case was brought by Al-Haq, a group located in Israel-occupied West Bank, and a global legal action network against the department for trade and trade.
The court stated that Trade Minister Jonathan Reynolds would “face a blunt option” to accept F -35 carving or withdraw from the F -35 program and to accept all defense and diplomatic results, which would ensure “which would ensure”.
The government also argued that pulling out of the defense program may reduce American trust in the UK and NATO.
But human rights groups argue that the global law is threatened by Gaza.
Yasmin Ahmed, UK director of Human Rights Watch, said, “The atrocities we are seeing in Gaza are fine because governments do not think the rules should apply to them.”
“Judicial honors for executive in this case have left the Palestinians in Gaza without reaching the security of international law, despite the government and court, a serious risk that UK equipment can be used to facilitate or do atrocities against them.”
The government says it will continue under its review of its defense export license.
A spokesman said, “The court has upheld the intensive and valid decision of the government on the matter.”
Advocates of human rights groups are considering if they can get the basis to appeal.
