nature of the rights involved.140 UN Resolution 194 states that “compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the governments or authorities responsible.”141 In its Advisory Opinion on the Wall, the ICJ specifically addressed the topic of compensation in light of the damages derived from the construction of the Wall, by recognizing that “in the event that […] restitution should prove to be materially impossible, Israel has an obligation to compensate the persons in question for the damage suffered. The Court considered that Israel also has an obligation to compensate, in accordance with the applicable rules of international law, all natural or legal persons having suffered any form of material damage as a result of the Wall’s construction.”142 To that aim, in 2007, the General Assembly created the United Nations Register of Damage Caused by the Construction of the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (UNRoD),143 conceived to be “a register of damage caused to all natural or legal persons concerned.”144 Denial of the Right to Compensation The obligation to provide compensation for Palestinian refugees has not only been challenged by Israel, but also by host Arab states and Palestinians themselves. In the case of Israel, the reasons are based on a denial of 140 For a more detailed analysis, see. See Michael Lynk, “Compensation for Palestinian Refugees: an International Law Perspective”, The Palestine Yearbook of International Law, XI, 2000/2001,155-183. For the basis of the right of compensation to Palestinian refugees under the Law of Nations (notably, the Law of Expropriation), see Boling, Absentees’ Property Laws, supra note 114, p. 122. See also UN General Assembly Resolution 194‎, supra note 41; UN General Assembly Resolution 36/146, supra note 124‎; UN General Assembly, Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources, A/RES/58/229, 23 December 2003, available at: http://www. un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/58/229 [accessed 27 Jul 2018]. 141 UN General Assembly Resolution 194, supra note 41‎, art. 11. 142 ICJ, Advisory Opinion on the Wall, supra note 15, para. 153. 143 UN General Assembly, Establishment of the United Nations Register of Damage Caused by the Construction of the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, A/RES/ES-10/17, 24 January 2007, available at: https://undocs.org/A/RES/ES-10/17 [accessed 27 Jul 2018]. 144 UN General Assembly, Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, A/RES/ES-10/15, 2 August 2004, available at https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal. nsf/0/F3B95E613518A0AC85256EEB00683444 [accessed 27 Jul 2018]. However, the system set up by the register has several flaws: for instance, non-material damages are not considered; the UNRoD Office is not a compensation commission, and it has no judicial, nor quasi-judicial status; the burden of production of evidence is placed solely on claimants. See Rhodri Williams, “United Nations Register of Damage (UNRoD) Rules and Regulations Governing the Registration of Claims, Introductory note”, International Legal Materials, 49, No. 2, (2010): 620-628. 51