1 Article 25 provides that the Basel Convention shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after the date of deposit of the twentieth instrument of ratification, acceptance, formal confirmation, approval or accession; (1989) 28 I.L.M. 657.

2 “Adoption of the Basel Treaty on Hazardous Waste — The Mediterranean at the Crossroads of Transboundary Movements” (II/1989) 17 MED.

3 For further reference see Handl, G. and Lutz, R., Transferring Hazardous Technologies and Substances: Tne International Legal Challenge (London, 1989).Google Scholar

4 In this incident, 40,000 tona of Italian chemical wastes were illegally dumped in the port of Koko, Nigeria in July, 1988. Subsequently the waste was removed and the loaded ship began to wander between ports, that refused the cargo entrance, until it was finally returned to Italy: Bulska, I.R., “Taking the International Hazards out of Hazardous Wastes”, (March 1989) Our Planet 3.Google Scholar

5 Resolutions and Decisions adopted by the General Assembly during its Forty-Fourth Session, Resolution no. 226 of 22 December, 1989 (Vol. 1) Supp. 49 (A/44/49), p. 149.

6 Kiss, A. and Shelton, D., International Environmental Law, (New York, 1991) 320.Google Scholar

7 Ibid., at 321.

8 The developing countries, realizing that they are becoming waste sites for the developed countries, oppose the import of hazardous wastes; supra n. 2.

9 supra n. 2, at 2.

10 25 March 1994; Time Weekly Magazine, 4 April 1994.

11 The Wall Street Journal Europe, Monday, 28 March 1994.

12 The Conference of the Parties may adopt such a resolution according to Article 15(7), supra n. 1.

13 Basel Convention, 1989, supra n. 1, Art. 4 (2)(a).

14 Ibid., 3rd and 17th paragraph of the Preamble to the Basel Convention.

15 Ibid.

16 supra n. 1, Art. 4(5).

17 Ibid., Art. 4(l)(b).

18 Ibid., Art. 4(2)(e).

19 Hazardous Substances Law, 1993, S.H. 1408.

20 A similar provision exists in Article 4(7)(a) of the Basel Convention, supra n. 1.

21 supra n. 19, sec. 3.

22 Ibid., sec. 4.

23 Licensing of Business (Disposal of Hazardous Wastes) Regulations, 1990, K.T. 1990, p. 22; sec. 2.

24 Supra n. 1, Art. 4(2)(b).

25 Ibid., Art. 4(2)(d).

26 K.T., 5 July 1994, p. 1152.

27 Letter dated January 5, 1994 from the Minister of the Environment to the persons appointed under the Hazardous Substances Law, supra n. 19, (unpublished).

28 Letter dated January 5, 1994 from the Minister of the Environment to Mr. Arieh Zeiff, Head of the Customs and Excise Department, (unpublished).

29 “Ha'aretz”, 22, December, 1993 (in Hebrew).

30 For a recent judgment on non-refoulement of fleeing Haitians which was given in the United States on August 1, 1992, see McNary v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc., 61 U.S.L.W. 3082. The issues discussed in this judgment are not relevant in our case.

31 “Ha'aretz”, April 6, 1994, p. A-l.

32 Letter to the Minister of Interior, dated September 10, 1993, (unpublished).

33 H.C. 5163/93 Plonim v. The Minister of Interior, of 7 February 1994, (unpublished).

34 “Yediot Ahronot”, June 16, 1994, A-17.

35 Ha'aretz”, April 26, 1994, p. A-10.

36 “Ha'aretz”, March 31, 1994, p. A-7.

37 Grahl-Madsen, A., Territorial Asylum, (Stockholm, 1980) 96.Google Scholar

38 189 U.N.T.S. 150.

39 Jahn, Eberhard, “Refugees” in Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. 8 (1992) 454.Google Scholar

40 606 U.N.T.S., 267.

41 See aleo Stenberg, G., Non-Expulsion and Non-Refoulement (Forlag, Sweden, 1989) 20.Google Scholar

42 Gilkerson, C.P., “Human Rights and Refugees in Crisis: An Overview and Introduction”, (1990) 1 Int'l J. Refugee L. 3.Google Scholar

43 This can be concluded from the definition of “Refugee” as provided in Article 1.

44 Kelley, J., “Refugee Protection: Whose Responsibility is it Anyway?” (1990) 1 Int'l J. Refugee L., 227.Google Scholar

45 Such an obligation binds all countries hosting refugees, whether they are parties to the relevant conventions or not, as a general principle of international law; Stenberg, supra n. 41, at 4.

46 Goodwin-Gill, G.S., “The Language of Protection”, (1989) 1 Int'l J. Refugee L. 6, at 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47 Goodwin-Gill, , The Refugee in International Law, (1983) 69.Google ScholarPubMed

48 See, for example, The Refugee Convention of 1951, supra n. 38 and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, supra n. 40; Article II(3) of The Convention of the Organization of African Unity Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa, 1001 U.N.T.S. 45; Article 3(2) of the 1967 European Convention on Extradition, 359 U.N.T.S. 276; The Comprehensive Plan of Action for Indochinese Refugees; The Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, 1984, which acknowledged the principle of non-refoulement as a customary norm; Gilkerson, supra n. 42, at 278.

49 Grahl-Madsen, supra n. 37, at 41.

50 G. Stenberg sees the principle of non-refoulement as a general rule of customary international law, whose contours are not clearly marked, especially with regard to exceptions that can be made by those states that have not adhered to the Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, Stenberg, supra n. 41, at 98.

51 Article 32(1) provides: “The Contracting States shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory save on grounds of national security or public order”.

52 A. Grahl-Madsen, supra n. 37, at 54.

53 Ibid.

54 Article 31(2) provides that states shall not restrict the movements of refugees unlawfully in the country unless “necessary”. Even a strict interpretation of this term would leave room for a state to consider the security factors involved in releasing such refugees.

55 H.H. (1990) no. 2130, p. 312.

56 Law Regarding the Agreement on the Status of United States Forcea, S.H. no. 1414, p. 62.

57 Ibid., Art. 2.

58 Woodliffe, J., The Peacetime Use of Foreign Military Installations under Modem International Law (Dordrecht, 1992) 170.Google Scholar

59 Lazareff, S., Status of Military Forces Under Current International Law (Leyden, 1971) 11.Google Scholar

60 Ibid.

61 Ibid., at 13.

62 (1812) 7 Crunch 116, as quoted by J. Woodlifle, supra n. 58, at 170.

63 Lazareff, supra n. 59, at 15.

64 Woodlifle, supra n. 58, at 170; Lazareff, supra n. 59, at 15.

65 Lazareff, supra n. 69, at 17.

66 Woodliffe, supra n. 68, at 172.

67 The Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Statue of their Forces, 199 UNTS 67; see Woodliffe, supra n. 58, at 172.

68 Statement made by the Minister of Justice, 125 Divrei Haknesset 1992, p. 3767.

69 supra n. 56, preamble to the Agreement in Annex 1.

70 supra n. 68, at 3758.

71 Ibid.

72 The Agreement Between the State of Israel and the United States of America Regarding the Status of United States Military Forces, Annex 1; supra n. 56.

73 supra n. 67; see Woodliffe, chap. 9, supra n. 68, for an analysis of the provisions on criminal jurisdiction as they appear in the NATO-SOFA agreement.

74 Such rights include: prompt access to legal representation of their choice; the right to a translator, the right to a speedy trial; the right to refrain from testifying against themselves; the right to contact the authorities of the US and the right to meet with visitors regularly, etc …

75 Woodliffe, supra n. 58, at 207.

76 Ibid.

77 NATO SOFA Agreement, supra n. 67, Article VIII.

78 supra n. 68, at 3768.

79 Appendix B to the agreement, supra n. 72 provides that Israel may choose, within three years of the agreement's entry into force, to substitute Article X part B with the provisions in the appendix. On the existing provisiona in Article X part B see text above.

80 supra n. 68, at 3758.

81 Woodliffe, Supra n. 58, at 173.

82 F.H. 376/90 Anheuser-Busch Inc. and others v. Budejovicky Budvar, Narodni Podnik Ceske Budejovice, (1992) 46(iv) P.D. 843.

83 19 L.S.I. 189.

84 923 U.N.T.S. 189.

85 supra n. 83, sec. 2.

86 Budejovicky Budvar, Narodni Podnik Ceske Budejovice v. Anheuser-Busch Inc., (1990) 44(ii) P.D. 631.

87 Sec. 21(a) of the Law, supra n. 83 provides that the Registrar may, by his own initiative, or by a request from anyone interested, remove a foreign appellation of origin from the registry ifit is not protected in the country of origin or if its protection in that country has ceased.

88 Such a procedure is possible in limited cases, according to sec. 18 of the Basic Law: Judicature (38 L.S.I. 101).

89 supra n. 84; Second Recital of the Preamble to the Lisbon Agreement.

90 Ibid., Article 4 refers to two existing international instruments that provide protection for appellations of origin: The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883), 161 C.T.S. 409; The Madrid Arrangement for the Prevention of False Indications of Origin of Goods (1891), 175 C.T.S. 53.

91 This definition is incorporated in Article 1 of the Appellations of Origin Law, supra n. 83.

92 The Administrative Authority of a Party State may declare within one year that it cannot ensure the protection of an appellation of origin, and the reasons therefor.

93 supra n. 82, at 858 (per Levin J.).

94 H.H. (1965) no. 88, p. 92.

95 supra n. 84, Article 6 provides that an appellation which has been granted protection in a Party State, shall not be considered as having become generic in that state, as long as it is protected as an appellation of origin in the country of origin.

96 supra n. 82, at 865.

97 Ibid., at 867.

98 supra n. 86.

99 supra n. 82, at 855.

100 Lapidoth, R., “The Practice and Case Law of lsrael in Matters Related to International Law”, (1993) 27 Is. L.R. 515, at 523.Google Scholar

101 1992 (iv) Pesakim 40, at 44.

102 supra n. 100, at 525.

103 Taichner v. Air France French Airlines (1987) 41(i) P.D. 589; see Lapidoth, supra n. 100.

104 This list woe kindly provided by Ms. Annie Dadon of the Treaty Division, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affaire, Jerusalem.