THE HAGUE: The UN’s highest court will commence hearings on Monday regarding the legal ramifications of the occupation of Palestinian territories since 1967. A record number of 52 countries are anticipating to present evidence during the week-long session at the Peace Palace in The Hague, which serves as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) headquarters.
In response to a request from the UN General Assembly in December 2022, seeking a non-binding “advisory opinion” on the “legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem,” the ICJ will deliberate. Although any ruling from the ICJ would not be legally binding, it coincides with increasing international legal pressure on Israel in the aftermath of the conflict in Gaza instigated by the October 7 Hamas attacks.
These hearings are distinct from a prominent case brought by South Africa, which accuses Israel of committing genocidal acts during the ongoing Gaza offensive.
The ICJ previously ruled in January that Israel must take all necessary measures to prevent genocide and facilitate humanitarian aid into Gaza but refrained from mandating a ceasefire. Despite rejecting South Africa’s plea for additional measures against Israel on Friday, the ICJ underscored the imperative of enforcing the ruling in its entirety.
The General Assembly has tasked the ICJ with examining two key questions. Firstly, the court will scrutinize the legal implications of what the UN defines as “the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.” This pertains to the extended occupation, settlement, and annexation of Palestinian territory since 1967, along with efforts to alter the demographic composition, character, and status of Jerusalem.
Secondly, the ICJ is tasked with advising on how Israel’s actions impact the legal status of the occupation and the resulting consequences for the UN and other nations. The court aims to deliver its ruling promptly, likely by the end of the year.
While the ICJ typically issues binding judgments in state disputes, in this instance, its opinion will be non-binding.
As stated by the court, “The requesting organ, agency, or organization remains free to give effect to the opinion by any means open to it, or not to do so.” Nevertheless, historically, most advisory opinions are acted upon.
The ICJ has previously provided advisory opinions on matters such as the legality of Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia and apartheid South Africa’s occupation of Namibia.
