ABSTRACT
An often-overlooked aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflict involves the role the law played during the British Mandate (1922–1948). The parties used the law to gain leverage against each other and influence international opinion, much as they do today. By the 1920s–30s the conflict had become as much a battle fought in the courtroom as in the streets, playing out in three dramatic trials focusing primarily on two issues: the interplay between conflicting wartime British promises to the Arabs (the “McMahon Pledge”) and the Jews (the Balfour Declaration); and the parties’ rights and claims to the Wailing Wall. In two instances – the Shaw Commission in 1929 and the Lofgren Commission in 1930 – Arabs and Jews faced off against each other in full-blown courtroom trials. Their lawyers made opening statements, closing arguments, and cross-examined each other’s witnesses under oath. In a third instance, the 1936–37 Peel Commission, the lawyers testified as witnesses and continued their legal advocacy. The Jews also quietly floated the idea of buying the Wall several times during the 1920s, without success. Previously unknown, and revealed here for the first time, was a secret Arab offer to settle the dispute by selling the Wall to the Jews.
