In 2023, Israel awarded exploration rights in several offshore blocks, including Zone G, which is described as being located adjacent to Gaza. The State of Palestine, following its accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), formally declared maritime boundaries in 2019, including an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extending from the Gaza coastline. These overlapping claims create uncertainty as to the legal status of offshore resources in this area.

Palestinian legal advocacy organisations, including Al‑Haq, Al Mezan and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, argue that a significant portion of Zone G overlaps with Palestinian maritime boundaries. The Israeli legal centre Adalah has similarly challenged the licensing decision, and the European Parliament has called on Israel to adhere to international humanitarian and human rights law in this context. Peer‑reviewed legal scholarship [1] [2] consistently treats offshore gas fields near Gaza, such as the Gaza Marine field, as lying within maritime zones claimed by Palestine under UNCLOS, while also recognising that Israel disputes these claims and maintains effective control over the area. As a result, the waters off Gaza are widely understood as subject to competing legal claims rather than clearly delimited boundaries.

The Italian energy company Eni, which had been part of the consortium associated with the Zone G exploration licenses, alongside Ratio Petroleum, Dana Petroleum and bp, has reportedly withdrawn from the project.

Overall, Israel’s licensing activity remains contested. From one perspective, granting exploration rights in areas claimed by Palestine raises questions under international law regarding resource exploitation in disputed maritime zones. From another, Israel does not recognise Palestinian maritime areas and treats the area as falling under its jurisdiction. The absence of an agreed maritime delimitation means that offshore areas such as Zone G are understood as part of a legally disputed area.

The Business and Human Rights Center invited the companies involved, including Eni, Dana Petroleum, Ratio Petroleum and bp to respond. Eni has responded confirming that it has withdrawn from the consortium. Bp and Ratio Petroleum also responded while Dana Petroleum did not.