§ Lord Hyltonasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether in their opinion Israel has contravened the status quo, which was internationally accepted and respected from 1856 to 1948, regarding universal access to the Holy Places in and near Jerusalem; and in particular whether there has been full and free access for persons coming from all parts of the West Bank, from Gaza and from all Arab countries.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyFrom the Declaration of the State onwards, Israel has always promised to respect Muslim and Christian Holy Places in and around Jerusalem, and allow free access to them. Since April 1993, however, access to Jerusalem for Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza, both Muslim and Christian, has often been restricted. Israel has justified these measures on grounds of security.
§ Lord Hyltonasked Her Majesty's Government:
What is the present value in international law of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181(II) of 29 November 1947, 194(111) of 11 December 1948 and 303(IV) of 9 December 1949 declaring the city of Jerusalem a corpus separatum under a special international régime; and what means exist, or could be envisaged, by which these resolutions might be brought into force.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyWe acknowledge thecorpus separatum defined by General Assembly Resolutions 181(II) of 1947, 194(III) of 1948, and 303(IV) of 1949, which includes the city of Jerusalem and its surroundings. These resolutions of the UN General Assembly were not mandatory. According to the Declaration of Principles signed by Israel and the Palestinians, the status of Jerusalem remains to be determined in the permanent status negotiations between 88WA the parties. The outcome of these negotiations should not be prejudiced by agreements reached for the interim period.
§ Lord Hyltonasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether any subsequent government of Israel has repudiated the statement of the then Prime Minister of that country (made on 7 April 1949 and reported in UN General Assembly Document A/838) that his government accepted without reservation an international régime for, or international control of, the Holy Places in the city of Jerusalem, but could not accept the establishment of an international régime for that city.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyWe know of no such repudiation by an Israeli government. To the contrary: in 1950, the Knesset declared that Jerusalem was the country's capital, although Israel held only the western sector of the city. Government institutions were progressively transferred there. Following the 1967 war, Israel annexed the old, eastern and former Jordanian sectorde facto. In 1980, Israel enacted its "Jerusalem law", formally proclaiming the united city to be its capital.
The UK is at one with the international community in rejecting all such claims. Our position has been repeatedly expressed in UN resolutions, in national statements and in company with our EU partners. We do not accept that commitments concerning the Holy Places alter, or are relevant to, the fact that Israel's efforts unilaterally to change the status of the city of Jerusalem contravene international law.