ABSTRACT
The longstanding Palestinian-Israeli custom and practice of using the law to gain leverage against each other and influence international opinion raises the question whether the law can play any role in helping the parties resolve their ongoing conflict. The three historic trials examined in this study do not provide much hope in that regard, except for the Lofgren Commission, which achieved modest success in quelling the Wailing Wall dispute by conducting a dignified proceeding and issuing a split verdict that left neither side with everything they wanted. But the Lofgren experience also demonstrated the futility of settlement discussions between the parties, as the Mufti absolutely refused any hint of compromise. Therefore, whether the law might play a constructive role in helping settle all or some portion of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute today depends on the parties’ willingness to use the law as a tool for resolving, rather than perpetuating the conflict.
