Addressing issues and concerns raised by the publication of the ‘Gaza Marine article’

Political Models for Developing the Gaza Marine Gas Field' (the 'Gaza Marine article').We accept that much of the criticism is valid, and necessary, especially in light of the horrific, dehumanizing violence in Gaza.Even as we write this editorial, the World Health Organization is reporting that two million people are starving in Gaza. 1 This follows the relentless Israeli attack that had already, by January 2024, killed an estimated 25,700 Palestinians and injured a further 63,000, damaged or destroyed over 360,000 houses, and displaced over 1.7 million personsfigures quoted by the International Court of Justice as it determined, in effect, that what was taking place was plausibly described as genocide. 2 In the subsequent 18 months, these numbers have swelled unthinkably, yet in plain sight. 3 At the Leiden Journal of International Law (LJIL), we are firmly committed to the fundamental principles of international law that annexation of territories is unlawful, and that the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination and the enjoyment of their natural resources.We apologize unreservedly to all who viewed the publication of this article as potentially contributing to normalizing the possibility of the annexation of Gaza.In this editorial, we seek to offer a transparent account of how this publication came about, and the steps we have taken since.These include steps with respect to this particular article, culminating in this special issue.They also include steps towards modifying our editorial decisionmaking process.As we explain further below, whilst the article did undergo double-blind peer review, the final decision to publish, although made in accordance with our editorial decisionmaking policy, revealed weaknesses in our existing editorial process.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Leiden Journal of International Law
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156525100393
Primary Topic
International Maritime Law Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Addressing issues and concerns raised by the publication of the ‘Gaza Marine article’

Surabhi Ranganathan, Eric De Brabandere, Joseph Powderly, Ingo Venzke
Leiden Journal of International Law
International Maritime Law Issues
article

Addressing issues and concerns raised by the publication of the ‘Gaza Marine article’

Surabhi Ranganathan, Eric De Brabandere, Joseph Powderly, Ingo Venzke
article en

Abstract

Political Models for Developing the Gaza Marine Gas Field' (the 'Gaza Marine article').We accept that much of the criticism is valid, and necessary, especially in light of the horrific, dehumanizing violence in Gaza.Even as we write this editorial, the World Health Organization is reporting that two million people are starving in Gaza. 1 This follows the relentless Israeli attack that had already, by January 2024, killed an estimated 25,700 Palestinians and injured a further 63,000, damaged or destroyed over 360,000 houses, and displaced over 1.7 million personsfigures quoted by the International Court of Justice as it determined, in effect, that what was taking place was plausibly described as genocide. 2 In the subsequent 18 months, these numbers have swelled unthinkably, yet in plain sight. 3 At the Leiden Journal of International Law (LJIL), we are firmly committed to the fundamental principles of international law that annexation of territories is unlawful, and that the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination and the enjoyment of their natural resources.We apologize unreservedly to all who viewed the publication of this article as potentially contributing to normalizing the possibility of the annexation of Gaza.In this editorial, we seek to offer a transparent account of how this publication came about, and the steps we have taken since.These include steps with respect to this particular article, culminating in this special issue.They also include steps towards modifying our editorial decisionmaking process.As we explain further below, whilst the article did undergo double-blind peer review, the final decision to publish, although made in accordance with our editorial decisionmaking policy, revealed weaknesses in our existing editorial process.

Leiden Journal of International LawVol. 38(1)
International Law Institute (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
International Maritime Law Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.