Developing the ability to engage in vigorous debate and oppositional advocacy is central to legal education. So why is American Branch of the International Law Association (ABILA) so averse to a diversity of opinions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
For its upcoming International Law Weekend (ILW) 2024, ABILA is set to host a panel titled “Palestine, Israel and International Law: The Long View, and Since October 2023.” Eight speakers are listed for the event. All eight share a sharply anti-Israel viewpoint. The panel isn’t a discussion; it’s a propaganda session.
It echoes a similar incident covered by CAMERA two years ago. During ILW 2022, ABILA held a panel titled “Racism and the Crime of Apartheid in International Law.” All three speakers were known anti-Israel activists obsessed with labeling Israel as an “apartheid” state. After CAMERA and its supporters wrote to the sponsors of ILW 2022, ABILA eventually relented and added a single dissenting voice, but only after adding a fourth anti-Israel activist to the panel.
The Speakers
ABILA claims that “[t]his year’s ILW is focused on engaged, interactive, and inclusive discussions … .” Based on the “Palestine, Israel and International Law” panel, ABILA’s commitment to “inclusive discussions” ends with the Jewish state. Consider the eight panelists.
First is Adil Haque, who has obsessively promoted the “genocide” libel against Israel over the past year.
Second is Tamara Tamimi, a policy member of the anti-Israel organization Al Shabaka. Her profile name on X (formerly Twitter) currently reads: “#StopTheGenocide-Tamara Tamimi.”
Third is Karin Loevy, an enthusiastic supporter of the BDS movement against Israel.
Fourth is Rabea Eghbariah, who authored the article “The Ongoing Nakba: Toward a Legal Framework for Palestine,” which, after being rejected by the Harvard Law Review, was revoked by the Columbia Law Review after it was published without going through the normal review process. The outlandish article accused Israel of “apartheid” and a slew of other alleged sins.
Fifth is Ralph Wilde, who has worked as a legal adviser for the Palestine Liberation Organization and the notorious anti-Israel organization Al Haq. More recently, he served as senior counsel and advocate for the League of Arab States in an advisory opinion case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.
Sixth is Ata Hindi, another Al Shabaka policy member. Earlier this year, Hindi was a featured speaker at a protest outside of Tulane University’s Hillel because it was hosting a dinner with an Israeli soldier.
Seventh is Balkees Jarrah, an associate director at Human Rights Watch, which has built a campaign based on lies to slander Israel with the charge of “apartheid.” Jarrah herself has promoted these lies.
Finally, there is Diala Shamas, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, known for waging lawfare against Israel. Her very first post on X after the Oct. 7 massacre was a retweet claiming that Israel is creating a “preemptive excuse for genocide” by calling the massacre “Israel’s 9/11.” By Oct. 16, Shamas declared that Israeli self-defense was already a “genocide.”
The Sponsors
ABILA’s theme for ILW 2024 is a lament that international law is “fac[ing] an existential threat” because “[s]ome people – both individually and collectively—are openly eschewing legal values and frameworks in order to pursue results through other means …” ABILA should spend some time reflecting on its own role.
Instead of strengthening the field of law through vigorous and open debate, ABILA shuts out dissenting points of view. Instead of encouraging real legal scholarship, ABILA has repeatedly heaped praise and honors on antisemitic propagandists like Navi Pillay, who are devoted to twisting the law and manipulating investigations to delegitimize the world’s only Jewish state.
Last year, three major law firms—White & Case, Debevoise & Plimpton, and Gibson Dunn—had their names removed as sponsors for ILW 2023 over its honoring of Pillay. This year only one law firm, Covington, remains.
Yet 19 law schools, including Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, where I earned my Juris Doctor, are currently listed as sponsors. Tuition dollars should go towards rigorous legal education and debate firmly rooted in legal and academic principles, not one-sided propaganda. The latter serves the interests of neither law students nor those interested in maintaining the integrity of the legal profession.
