New StopCemex Infographic in English
Posted inSem categoria /

New StopCemex Infographic in English

. This downloadable infographic explains the deep complicity of Cemex in Israeli apartheid: it owns 4 production plants in Israel’s illegal settlements and provides construction material to the Wall, the settlements and military checkpoints. 

Download the infographic here.

Since 2005, CEMEX1 owns the Israeli Readymix Industries, a producer and supplier of raw materials for the construction industry.

Readymix Industries2:

  • has plants in various settlements including Mevo Horon, Atarot and Mishor Edomim industrial zones in the occupied West Bank, and Katzerin in the occupied Golan Heights.

  • has provided concrete elements for the construction of Israel’s illegal Wall along the Gilo bridge in the occupied West Bank.

  • has provided concrete elements for the construction of military checkpoints in the West Bank, among them the Hawara and Azun-Atma checkpoints.

  • has provided concrete elements for the construction of the light rail project in Jerusalem, which is designed to connect the city of Jerusalem with settlements around it and internationally recognised as violating international law.

  • provides concrete elements for the construction of settlements and outposts in the West Bank.


Cemex operations in occupied Palestinian and Syrian territory: are a grave violation of international law and human rights may trigger criminal liability and demand state action.

Cemex sells quarry in occupied Palestinian territory under pressure:

  • Until June 2015, Cemex was a 50% co-owner of the Yatir quarry through Readymix’ subsidiary Lime and Stone production. Yatir quarry is a mining site located south of the Palestinian city of Dhahiriya in the West Bank.

  • Cemex sold its stake in Yatir quarry after the Norwegian Pension Fund KLP (June 2015)and Sweden based Nordea Asset Management Fund (March 2015)4 divested from Cemex.

Cemex position on its current operations:

  • Cemex argues that it only operates and provides material for ‘legal settlements’, i.e. approved by the Israeli government.

  • Under international law and according to the Mexican government all settlements, the Wall and the related regime and infrastructure are illegal.

  • Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights5 and Dr. Shane Darcy, professor at the Irish Center for Human Rights, National University Galway6 have demonstrated the fallacy of the argument.


2. Violations of human rights and international law

Settlements, the Wall and related infrastructure have resulted in:

  • extensive unlawful expropriation of private and public Palestinian property affecting approximately one third of the entire public and private Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as well as its water and other natural resources and in the annexation, de jure or de facto, and permanent integration of large areas of the occupied West Bank (approximately 50 per cent) into the State of Israel

  • large-scale forced population transfer, including the transfer of more than 500,000 Jewish settlers into the OPT, mainly by means of a regulatory regime, including economic incentives and public and private services for companies, and the forcible transfer of the Palestinian population within and outside the OPT.

  • the infringement of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people and unlawful infringement of the entire set of human rights of the occupied Palestinian population the establishment of a discriminatory legislative and regulatory regime in the OPT that privileges Israel’s settlers, while depriving the occupied Palestinian population of internationally guaranteed rights.


Settlements, the Wall and related infrastructure constitute war crimes and violations of non derogable peremptory norms obligations erga omnes, which are owed by Israel to the entire international community and that all States have a legal duty to protect.



  • All States have the legal obligations laid out in ILC Article 41, i.e., (1) to cooperate to bring to an end Israel’s serious breaches, and (2) not to recognise as lawful the illegal situation created by Israel, nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation.

  • These Israeli violations trigger not only state responsibility, but also individual criminal liability under the Rome Statute of the ICC and other standards of international criminal law.

  • The primary responsibility for promoting and protecting human rights, and for ensuring respect for international law and human rights by non-state actors, remains with States. However, legal development in recent years has emphasized as well the legal responsibility of companies, parastatal institutions and financial actors.7

  • Not only states and public entities but also private actors are under the obligation to terminate all funding, contracts or other economic and institutional relations with actors that allow, support or encourage the continuation of Israeli violations of international law.









7 In 2006, the International Red Cross emphasized that international humanitarian law is binding not only on States and armed groups, but also on commercial enterprises. In 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council resolution A/HRC/RES/17/4, adopting the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, emphasized that transnational corporations and other business have the responsibility to respect human rights. The Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Secretary-General on Business and Human Rights has concluded that companies are now considered to be duty bearers under international criminal law. See: