British Court Dismisses Palestinian Organization's Appeal on F-35 Parts Export to Israel
November 12, 2025143 VistasTiempo de lectura: 2 minutos
Tamaño de fuente
16
On Wednesday, a British appeals court dismissed a request from the Palestinian human rights organization "Al-Haq" to contest a previous ruling that upheld the legality of the UK’s authorization for the indirect export of spare parts for F-35 aircraft to Israel. The court recognized the possibility that these parts could be used in violations of international humanitarian law.
The organization, based in the West Bank, sought to appeal a decision made by the UK Department for Business and Trade last year, which excluded F-35 spare parts from a suspension of arms export licenses that could be used in the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
The court ruled that national security considerations fall within the purview of the British government, which has the right to weigh these factors against any legal assessment of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law.
Furthermore, the court stated that the lower court was correct in deeming the decision legal, leading to the rejection of the appeal.
This ruling has drawn criticism from human rights organizations, which argue that the court prioritizes political and security considerations over legal and humanitarian principles, especially amid rising international concerns regarding the use of Western weapons in conflicts in Gaza.
It is worth noting that a similar legal challenge is underway in the Netherlands, where human rights organizations are seeking to halt the export of F-35 components to Israel, reflecting an increasing European debate on the responsibility of exporting countries in monitoring the use of arms in armed conflicts.
The organization, based in the West Bank, sought to appeal a decision made by the UK Department for Business and Trade last year, which excluded F-35 spare parts from a suspension of arms export licenses that could be used in the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
The court ruled that national security considerations fall within the purview of the British government, which has the right to weigh these factors against any legal assessment of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law.
Furthermore, the court stated that the lower court was correct in deeming the decision legal, leading to the rejection of the appeal.
This ruling has drawn criticism from human rights organizations, which argue that the court prioritizes political and security considerations over legal and humanitarian principles, especially amid rising international concerns regarding the use of Western weapons in conflicts in Gaza.
It is worth noting that a similar legal challenge is underway in the Netherlands, where human rights organizations are seeking to halt the export of F-35 components to Israel, reflecting an increasing European debate on the responsibility of exporting countries in monitoring the use of arms in armed conflicts.
