UK F-35 parts exports to Israel is lawful, High Court rules

The British Supreme Court rejected a case brought by campaignists trying to stop the transfer of all British-made spare parts for the F-35 fighter aircraft produced by the United States and said it did not have the constitutional authority to intervene.

The government suspended approximately 30 weapons export licenses last September due to the risk of using the UK weapons in the Gaza Strip violation of the Gaza Strip.

However, Britain supply components to a global F-35s pool that Israel can access. The government argued that it could not be withdrawn from the defense program without endangering international peace.

International Amnesty International and Human Rights Monitoring Organization expressed their horrors in the decision.

Both groups intervened in the case.

“The terrible reality in Gaza emerges at the world at full glance: all families have been destroyed, civilians killed in the so -called safe zones were reduced to rubble, and a ruthless blockade and a population to be displaced,” he said.

“This decision does not change the facts on the ground and does not eliminate the British government’s responsibilities within the scope of international law.”

The two judges said that the case is not about whether Britain would supply weapons and other military equipment to Israel – because the government decided that it should not be.

They were asked to decide on a particular issue: Britain was asked whether some parts produced could be provided to Israel and whether the UK had to withdraw from a certain multilateral defense cooperation “because of the possibility of being used unlawfully in the clash in Gaza.

“In accordance with our Constitution, this acute sensitive and political issue is not a democratic parliament and ultimately questioning against voters.”

According to the campaign against arms trade, the British industry is doing 15% of each F-35.

Oxfam, who provides evidence to the court, “the government, Gaza, intentionally attack civilians and to eliminate survival vehicles, including vital water resources, knowing that the F-35 jets continue to license the sale of components.” He said.

The case was introduced by the global legal processing network against Al-Haq, a group in the West Bank occupied by Israel and the Ministry of Business and Trade.

The court said that Business Minister Jonathan Reynolds is faced with a blunt choice to “cut F-35 or withdraw from the F-35 program and accept all defense and diplomatic consequences that will emerge.”

The government also argued that withdrawing from the defense program could weaken its confidence in the US and NATO.

However, human rights groups argue that the global rule of law is threatened against Gaza.

“The atrocities we witnessed in Gaza do not think exactly the rules should be valid for them,” said Yasmine Ahmed, Director of Human Rights Watch.

“In this case, the judicial postponement in this case, despite the government and court, despite the fact that the UK equipment can be used to facilitate or execute the persecution against them, although the Palestinians in Gaza left the protection of international law.”

The government will continue to review the defense export license, he said.

“The Court supported this government’s comprehensive and legal decisions on this issue.” He said.

For human rights groups, lawyers think whether they can find reasons for appeal.