Amnesty International has called on all states to block the docking of the Portuguese-flagged vessel, Holger G, which is currently transporting arms components to Israel. The ship, having embarked from India, is bound for Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, and its subsidiary, IMI Systems. Concerned about the cargo’s potential use in conflicts, Amnesty urged states to take measures that would prevent the arms from reaching Israel.
Erika Guevara Rosas from Amnesty International highlighted the urgency of the matter, emphasizing the potential contribution to violations of international law, including allegations of genocide against Palestinians. The organization’s call comes amid heightened scrutiny over the transfer of arms to regions embroiled in conflict, as highlighted here.
Amnesty stressed the obligations of states under Common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions and the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), urging Portugal to halt the cargo’s progress. The group warned that permitting the shipment could implicate states and corporate actors in violations, echoing the sentiments detailed in the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion.
The German shipping company, Reederei Gerdes, which owns the Holger G, was also cautioned about potential complicity in alleged war crimes. The shipping lane of the Holger G, currently en route to Egypt and having passed through the Strait of Gibraltar, underscores the logistical challenges in intercepting the shipment without a concerted international effort.
The situation gains complexity as the International Criminal Court recently confirmed jurisdiction over investigations into alleged war crimes in the Gaza Strip, following events in October 2023. This development adds an additional layer of international legal implications to the ongoing debate over arms supplies to regions like the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
This situation has been further complicated by Germany’s recent decision to lift restrictions on arms deliveries to Israel. While Elbit Systems maintains that its operations are legitimate under international law, rights groups argue that failing to stop the arms transfer contradicts international obligations, a contention that continues to fuel this complex geopolitical issue.