refugee status, or Israel on their behalf, should direct their claims to the respective Arab states, and Israel should not seek to tie those claims to any negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. In effect, Israel is creating a false equivalence between the responsibilities of the Arab states towards Arab Jews, as the alleged offending states, and Palestinians, for whom Arab states bear legal responsibilities as any other third state party bares obligations for gross violations of international law, but for whom Israel bears primary responsibility. 2.3. Right to Compensation Another component of reparation can be represented by the payment of a monetary sum for harms suffered.136 As international law expressly points at restitution in kind as the preferred form of reparation and durable solution, compensation should be considered a complementary means of reparation, applicable either when restitution is not factually possible anymore, as determined by an independent, impartial tribunal,137 or when the right holder knowingly accepts it in lieu of restitution, according to the principle of voluntariness. Compensation may include recompense for material losses (e.g. for any damage to their returned properties, for the income derived from the interim use of returned properties, or for those who choose not to exercise their right of return138) as well as non-material losses139 (e.g. social and moral damages, or lost earnings and opportunities as a result of displacement). As with the right of return and the right to restitution, refugees’ and IDPs’ right to compensation rests upon IHRL, IHL and the Law of Nations. It is also explicitly considered under refugee law and is reflected in and strengthened by numerous UN Resolutions, including Resolution 194, which refers to “principles of international law and equity” and thus confirms the customary 136 Pinheiro Principles, supra note 107, Principle 21. 137 Pinheiro Principles, supra note 107, Principles 2 and 21. 138 Compensation is not in a mutually exclusive relationship with the right of return - these rights are instead complementary among each other, as confirmed by paragraph 11 of Resolution 194. For those who choose not to exercise their right of return, compensation (for both material and non-material losses) can always be claimed. 139 See for example, the compensation recognized for Jewish victims of Nazi atrocities under the Wiedergutmachung program, described in Atif Kubursi, Palestinian Losses in 1948: The Quest for Precision (Washington, DC: The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine, 1996). See also Hannah Garry, “The Right to Compensation and Refugee Flows: a ‘Preventative Mechanism’ in International Law?”, International Journal of Refugee Law, 10, No. 1/2 (1998): 114. 50