Related Rule
Germany
Practice Relating to Rule 150. Reparation
Section A. General
In 1995, in reply to a question from members of the Lower House of Parliament with respect to reparation payments to Greek victims of the German National Socialist regime, the German Government stated:
The … alleged claims of Greece with regard to Germany are claims for reparation … After 50 years have passed since the end of the war and [after] decades of peaceful, trustingly and fruitful co-operation of the Federal Republic of Germany with the international community of States, the issue of reparations has lost its legitimacy. Since the end of the Second World War, Germany has made reparations to a high degree, which, according to general public international law, the States concerned should use to compensate their nationals … Additionally, reparations [made] 50 years after the end of hostilities would constitute an exception without precedence in the practice of public international law. 
Germany, Lower House of Parliament, Response by the federal government to a question from members of parliament, Payments in compensation to Greek victims of the National Socialist regime, BT-Drucksache 13/2878, 7 November 1995.
In 2009, in reply to a Minor Interpellation in the Bundestag (Lower House of Parliament) entitled “Gaza War”, Germany’s Federal Government wrote:
b) Does the Federal Government consider it necessary to require Israel to make reparation for Gaza in order to repair the damage caused by the war?
In principle a State’s responsibility under international law is only engaged in case the State acted contrary to international law. In this respect, reference is made to the answers to questions 2 and 4. 
Germany, Lower House of Federal Parliament (Bundestag), Reply by the Federal Government to the Minor Interpellation by the Members Dr. Norman Paech, Monika Knoche, Wolfgang Gehrcke, further Members and the Parliamentary Group DIE LINKE, BT-Drs. 16/12087, 27 February 2009, p. 6.
The Federal Government further stated:
2. a) Is it correct that the Federal Government still considers the Gaza-Strip as territory occupied by Israel?
b) If so, does the Federal Government share the view that the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians constitutes an international armed conflict?
c) If not, why not?
On 12 September 2005, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip after 38 years. However, it continues to exercise control over the borders and airspace of the Gaza Strip. The Federal Government is thus of the view that the civilian population in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel is protected by international humanitarian law, in particular the [1949] Geneva Convention IV relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. This remains the case as long as Israel is exercising effective control over the Gaza Strip as occupying power. Therefore, in the Federal Government’s view, the provisions of the Geneva Convention IV relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Times of War apply to the armed confrontations between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. 
Germany, Lower House of Federal Parliament (Bundestag), Reply by the Federal Government to the Minor Interpellation by the Members Dr. Norman Paech, Monika Knoche, Wolfgang Gehrcke, further Members and the Parliamentary Group DIE LINKE, BT-Drs. 16/12087, 27 February 2009, p. 3.
The Federal Government also stated:
4. How does the Federal Government justify its position that despite the allegations of independent international observers that Israel committed war crimes and human rights violations during the recent war in the Gaza Strip, the creation of an International Commission to investigate such allegations is to be blocked?
The Federal Government has always emphasized that fundamental rules of international humanitarian law must also be respected in Gaza … An investigation commission of the United Nations which examines attacks against UN installations and operations during the Gaza war began its work on 12 February 2009 and will report to the Secretary General of the United Nations after completing its investigations. The Federal Government agrees with its partners in the European Union that the result of these investigations should not be pre-empted. This common position is also reflected in the Council conclusions of 26 and 27 January 2009: “The Council reminds all parties to the conflict to fully respect human rights and comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law and will follow closely investigations into alleged violations of international humanitarian law.” 
Germany, Lower House of Federal Parliament (Bundestag), Reply by the Federal Government to the Minor Interpellation by the Members Dr. Norman Paech, Monika Knoche, Wolfgang Gehrcke, further Members and the Parliamentary Group DIE LINKE, BT-Drs. 16/12087, 27 February 2009, p. 4.