THE HAGUE, Netherlands – Concluding a week of intense discussions, the United Nations’ principal judicial body deliberates on Friday regarding Israel’s responsibility to guarantee the provision of necessary humanitarian aid to Palestinians in both Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Last year, the U.N. General Assembly sought an advisory ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning Israel’s legal duties following its effective prohibition of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) – Gaza’s chief aid supplier. This decision could set a significant precedent affecting not only the U.N.’s role in Gaza but its operations globally.
The timing is critical, given the critical state of Gaza’s aid system and a stalled ceasefire process. Since early March, Israel has barred essential supplies, including food, fuel, and medicines. The situation intensified when Israel resumed aerial attacks in mid-March, breaking a ceasefire to reclaim areas and pressure Hamas into hostage releases.
Although Israel contests claims of deliberately assaulting civilians and humanitarian workers, it abstained from attending the recent ICJ hearings, choosing instead to submit a 38-page document for judicial consideration.
Central to the hearings was the question of aid delivery to Palestinians; however, the ICJ’s advisory opinion could extend to interpreting the legal authorities of the U.N. “The court can clarify the legal immunity of the United Nations in its operations worldwide,” explained legal expert Mike Becker. Although the court’s opinions are termed “nonbinding,” they hold significant weight.
The matter under consideration, prompted by Norway’s proposal, urges the ICJ to rule on “Israel’s obligations” to assure the unhindered delivery of vital aid to Palestinians. Despite strong U.S. support for Israel, the motion was passed.
Israel’s decision, effective from January, to restrict UNRWA’s operations, came amidst heightened criticism from Israeli leaders claiming links between the agency and Hamas – allegations UNRWA denies.
“This opinion is pivotal,” Becker remarked, emphasizing its significance in reinforcing the U.N.’s mandate to operate without external influence.
Expert Juliette McIntyre from the University of South Australia highlighted the wider implications of the ruling, suggesting that legal clarifications here could affect U.N. operations globally. As breaches of international norms risk weakening them, a strong stance from the ICJ could reinforce these principles.
In previous proceedings, the ICJ delivered a sweeping denouncement of Israel’s occupation status, calling for its withdrawal and reaffirming Palestinian rights. The current legal submissions reiterate points from this prior decision, aiming to build on them.
During Monday’s session, Palestine accused Israel of international law violations, while expressing optimism about future proceedings. “Our journey involves building our rights through these international platforms,” stated Palestinian envoy Riyad Mansour.
Conversely, Israel challenged the legitimacy of the court proceedings. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar criticized various U.N. bodies, accusing them of politicizing legal institutions against Israel’s right to self-defense.
The ICJ’s advisory opinion is expected to emerge over the coming months, providing significant insights into the legal landscape surrounding humanitarian aid in conflict zones.