aspects of the right to health are particularly relevant to detention conditions.186 Certain counter-terrorism measures may also directly breach economic and social rights. This was graphically illustrated by the “Israeli wall case”, where a number of violations of the ICESCR were identified as a result of the building of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories for the purpose of protecting Israeli security. Rights found to be violated included the right to education, health and an adequate standard of living.187 Measures leading to asset freezing or confiscation may engage economic, social and cultural rights. States should also give consideration to the protection of the economic, social and cultural rights of victims of terrorism. Furthermore, the guarantee of economic, social and cultural rights may be a key element in preventing people from feeling alienated within their societies; such alienation may be a factor in people’s decisions to adopt the tactics of terrorism. Therefore, those devising strategies to combat terrorism must also be aware of the issues arising out of economic, social and cultural rights and how they work, in particular through the application of the ICESCR and the European Social Charter.188 189 CASE EXAMPLE: National security and the obligation to protect economic, social and cultural rights: the Israeli wall case189 The construction by Israel of a wall on and through the Occupied Palestinian Territories raises a number of relevant issues and lessons. Although the case was chiefly resolved by reference to matters concerning self-determination, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the main court of the United Nations, found Israel in breach of international law and made a number of other findings of interest in relation to human rights more broadly. The ICJ considered the impact of the construction of the wall on the daily life of the inhabitants of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The wall’s construction, the ICJ found, involved the destruction or requisition of private property, restrictions on freedom of movement, confiscation of agricultural land and cut-off of access to primary water sources, amongst other matters. As such, the ICJ found that the construction of the wall and its associated regime were not only contrary to international humanitarian law and aspects of the laws of war, but also a violation of the ICCPR and the economic, social and cultural rights contained in the ICESCR. The ICJ pointed out that the wall violated that Covenant because it impeded the exercise by the persons concerned of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living. Of particular relevance to counter-terrorism, the ICJ also put in context the circumstances in which a state may rely upon justifications for limiting, qualifying or more broadly interfering with human rights standards. The ICJ acknowledged that certain humanitarian law and human rights instruments include qualifying clauses or provisions for derogation that may be invoked by States Parties where military exigencies or the needs of national security or public order so require. However, the Court pointed out that in this particular case, it was not convinced that the specific route Israel had chosen for the wall was necessary to attain its security objectives. When the ICJ reached this conclusion — that the limitation, qualification and derogation clauses were not relevant in the context of the stated justification for the wall — Israel was unable to rely upon a right of self-defence or on a state of necessity. The Court therefore went on to find that the construction of the wall constituted “breaches by Israel of several of its obligations under the applicable international humanitarian law and human rights instruments.” 186 See for example the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health, Paul Hunt, and specifically op. cit., note 178, Situation of detainees at Guantánamo Bay, paras. 66-82. 187 Op. cit., note 124, ICJ, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, paras. 114-137. 188 Key treaties guaranteeing economic, social and cultural rights include the ICESCR and the Council of Europe’s Social Charter. Additionally, ICERD, CEDAW and CRC all contain certain ESC rights. The OSCE also has extensive commitments in relation to economic, social and cultural rights. For an overview see op. cit., note 164, OSCE/ ODIHR, OSCE Human Dimension Commitments, Volume 1, pp. 131-137. 189 Op. cit., note 124, ICJ, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights 77