English abstract
The occupation Army – as a temporary status – should maintain the status facto in the occupied territories, fulfill the needs of the civilians and provide them with all services. The right to recur to the natural judge (justice) is a primordial need. Accordingly, article 43 and 63 of the Fourth Geneva Convention Relating to the protection of civilians provide the protection and the continuance of the judicial system in the occupied territory, prevent the occupied army from targeting the legislation in effect, by amend or abolish them, unless they cause a serious threat to safety of the occupation, its armed forces or prevent them from complying with the obligations provided in the convention. The protection of the judicial system is not limited to the current legislations, but also include all individuals who run the show, such as judges and their assistants. They and their families should not be subject to any mistreatment, humiliation, minimize their advantages, or worsen their work circumstances.
The protection of the judicial system includes the continuance of the judicial guarantees to the individuals. The authority of the occupied armed forces, to replace the running civil courts with military courts from its own armed forces personnel, does not prevent its responsibility to assure the continuance of the judicial guarantees. As provided in articles 39 and 54 of the fourth Geneva Convention, the protection of the judges and their assistants find its roots in the fact that they are considered as employee of the occupied territory, side to side with their position as judicial team. In order to enforce such protection, the IHL provides the right to member state to submit a complain to the ICRC, or, in case of partial occupation, form a committee of investigation by the approval of both parties. The ICC may examine only sever violations of the IHL, which may result from the ignorance of the protection of the judicial system such as killing, rape and torture. The occupied armed forces have the authority to prosecute its individuals who are involved in crimes against the judicial system and individuals of the occupied territory, which the practice proved its inefficiency. Finally, the occupied territory, after its liberation, may prosecute individuals who are involved in such crimes.
