Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
The 2004 International Court of Justice advisory opinion addressed the legality of Israel's West Bank barrier. Through October 2023 the opening said Israel argued that the barrier was necessary to keep out West Bank militants and avert more suicide attacks against its citizens. Today that sentence is gone from the opening, which now runs a single sentence naming only the case and date, though militant survives twice in the body. A reader arriving now learns the ICJ issued an advisory opinion on the barrier, not that Israel argued the barrier was built to stop militants and suicide attacks.
Read line by line and written up by hand.
Machine-checked against the full current article on 2026-08-01. “militant” appeared 1 times in this article's opening at its peak. Today the opening has none; the body has 2.
We saved snapshots of this article over twenty years; you are reading the 2020 one. Red dashes: removed from Wikipedia since.Pale dots: rewritten; the numbered note shows what it says now.Red text: written in or rewritten since the previous snapshot.1 tap a number or a side note to jump between them
The opening as it read in 2020
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (commonly known as the Israeli Wall advisory opinion ) of 9 July 2004 is an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in relation to the Israeli West Bank barrier . The court responded to a request from the United Nations General Assembly of 10 December 2003 on the legal question under international law of the Israeli West Bank barrier built by Israel that partially follows the Green Line boundary between Israel and the West Bank and partially enters into the Israeli-occupied West Bank . The barrier has been a controversial subject and a cause of heightened tensions in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict . Israel argued that the barrier was necessary to keep out West Bank militants and avert more suicide attacks against its citizens. Israel began construction of the barrier during the Second Intifada in September 2000, along and exceeding beyond the 1949 Green Line. In its non-binding opinion, the Court found that the barrier violates international law and should be torn down. The vote of the justices was 14 to 1, with Thomas Buergenthal dissenting. The judgement was invoked in November 2006 by Al-Haq , a Palestinian human rights group , which brought a case in the UK Court of Appeal against the British government to end export licences to Israel to "secure the implementation of the July 2004 [ICJ] Advisory Opinion on Israel's Wall". The case was dismissed in November 2008. The judgement was also referred to in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 66/225 of 22 December 2011.1 Brownlie's Principles of public international law (8 ed.).
This is Wikipedia's own text, saved in our repository. Their copy of it is revision 939403170.
The opening as it stood on October 6, 2023
Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (commonly known as the Israeli Wall advisory opinion ) of 9 July 2004 is an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in relation to the Israeli West Bank barrier . The court responded to a request from the United Nations General Assembly of 10 December 2003 on the legal question under international law of the Israeli West Bank barrier built by Israel that partially follows the Green Line boundary between Israel and the West Bank and partially enters into the Israeli-occupied West Bank . The barrier has been a controversial subject and a cause of heightened tensions in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict . Israel argued that the barrier was necessary to keep out West Bank militants and avert more suicide attacks against its citizens. Israel began construction of the barrier during the Second Intifada in September 2000, along and exceeding beyond the 1949 Green Line. In its non-binding opinion, the Court found that the barrier violates international law and should be torn down. The vote of the justices was 14 to 1, with Thomas Buergenthal dissenting. The judgement was invoked in November 2006 by Al-Haq , a Palestinian human rights group , which brought a case in the UK Court of Appeal against the British government to end export licences to Israel to "secure the implementation of the July 2004 [ICJ] Advisory Opinion on Israel's Wall". The case was dismissed in November 2008. The judgement was also referred to in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 66/225 of 22 December 2011. Brownlie's Principles of public international law (8 ed.).
Red text was written in or rewritten since the previous snapshot. Their copy is revision 1125261819.
The opening as it stood in 2025 9 passages from the previous snapshot no longer appear
Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (commonly known as the Israeli Wall advisory opinion ) of 9 July 2004 is an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in relation to the Israeli West Bank barrier . Brownlie's Principles of public international law (8 ed.).
Red text was written in or rewritten since the previous snapshot. Their copy is revision 1275195415. This is our newest snapshot; the live article may have moved again since.
Today
“militant” appeared 1 times in this article's opening at its peak. Today the opening has none; the body has 2. Read the current article and compare.
2010
2015
2020
Oct '23
2025
militant
0
0
1
1
0
Counts in the opening at each snapshot. Green: the word gained ground. Red: it was cut. Grey: no change.
Where the word went
It left the opening. It did not leave the article. Wikipedia moved it down the page, where a reader arriving from a search result will not reach it.
“militant” now appears 2× under Statement, 40% of the way down the article
Struck red text is no longer in the article; dotted amber text was rewritten. Every revision id links to Wikipedia's copy; the text shown is our own saved copy. Data: /data. Wikipedia text is CC BY-SA; quoted for the record; not affiliated with Wikipedia.
