ICJ emergency orders to Israel: global response and its legal obligations

Hague, 27 January, 2024 (TDF): In a long-awaited decision, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued six emergency orders to Israel concerning its actions in the Gaza conflict. While stopping short of calling for a full ceasefire, the ICJ’s directives address critical aspects of the situation in Gaza and Israel’s obligations under international law.

ICJ’s emergency orders

The ICJ responded to South Africa’s genocide case against Israel. South Africa alleged that Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide. Israel claims self-defense and necessity in combating Hamas. The ICJ asserted its jurisdiction to hear South Africa’s case.

Key highlights of the ICJ’s ruling include:

• Prevention of Genocidal Acts: Israel must take all possible measures to prevent acts outlined in Article 2 of the 1948 Genocide Convention, including refraining from killing members of the Palestinian group and preventing conditions that could lead to their destruction.
• Restriction on Military Actions: Israel’s military is mandated to refrain from actions outlined in the Genocide Convention.
• Prevention of Incitement to Genocide: Israel must prevent and punish direct and public incitement to commit genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
• Delivery of Humanitarian Aid: Israel is obligated to ensure the delivery of basic services and essential humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza.
• Preservation of Evidence and Access for Fact-Finding: Israel must prevent the destruction of evidence of war crimes in Gaza and allow access to fact-finding missions.
• Reporting Requirement: Israel must submit a comprehensive report on the steps taken to abide by the court’s measures within one month, with South Africa afforded the opportunity to respond.

Pakistan’s response

Pakistan welcomed the ICJ’s provisional measures. It acknowledged the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the case against Israel. Pakistan deemed South Africa’s claims of genocide “plausible”. Foreign Office spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch emphasized the need for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end Gaza’s suffering.

South Africa’s response

South African foreign ministry has remarked the ruling as ‘decisive victory’.

The statement read, “Today marks a decisive victory for the international rule of law and a significant milestone in the search for justice for the Palestinian people.”

It also stated, “There is no credible basis for Israel to continue to claim that its military actions are in full compliance with international law, including the Genocide Convention, having regard to the Court’s ruling. South Africa sincerely hopes that Israel will not act to frustrate the application of this order, as it has publicly threatened to do, but that it will instead act to comply with it fully, as it is bound to do.”

Turkey’s response

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan regarded the provisional measures on the genocide case against Israel as ‘valuable’.

posting in X, formerly twitter, President Erdogan said, “”I find the temporary injunction taken by the International Court of Justice regarding the inhumane attacks in Gaza valuable and welcome it. We will continue to follow the process to ensure that war crimes committed against innocent Palestinian civilians do not go unpunished.”

“We hope that this decision, which is binding on the countries party to the Genocide Convention, will lead to an end to Israel’s indiscriminate attacks against women, children and the elderly,” he added.

European Union’s response

European Union remarked that it want ‘immediate’ implementation of the court’s ruling. The statement read, “Orders of the International Court of Justice are binding on the parties, and they must comply with them. The European Union expects their full, immediate and effective implementation.”

Spain’s response

Spain’s foreign ministry has called on all the parties to ‘comply’ with the ruling of the international court, “Spain calls on all parties to respect and comply with these measures in their entirety. Once again, Spain reiterates its call for an immediate ceasefire, the unconditional release of the hostages, immediate and regular humanitarian access and the need to move towards to establishing the two-state solution.”

Ireland’s response

Ireland’s foreign minister welcomed the decision and called on Israel to” implement all the provisional measures ordered by the court, as a matter of urgency.”

Micheal Martin  also added, “I strongly welcome the Court’s orders, which are final and binding. These are measures that Ireland has been consistently calling for from the start of this conflict.”

Scotland’s response

Scotland First Minister Humza Yousaf called the ICJ ruling as “landmark decision” which “is clear” that the destruction in Gaza “must stop”.

He also said, on X, “Urgent humanitarian assistance must be provided to prevent more suffering.”

“Hostages must be released immediately. With such death and destruction, we will continue to call for an immediate ceasefire,” he added.

Iran’s response

Iran’s foreign minister also called on Israel to face justice following the ruling of ICJ.

“Today, the authorities of the fake Israeli regime… must be brought to justice immediately for committing genocide and unprecedented war crimes against the Palestinians,” Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian said on the X.

Senior Hamas leader’s response

Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri called the ICJ’s ruling ‘important development’, “”an important development that contributes to isolating the occupation (Israel) and exposing its crimes in Gaza. We call for compelling the occupation to implement the court’s decisions.”

Palestinian foreign ministry’s response

Palestinian foreign minister Riyad Al Maliki also welcomed the court’s decision and called it in favour of ‘international law and humanity’.

“The ICJ judges assessed the facts and the law, they ruled in favour of humanity and international law. We call on all states to ensure that all provisional measures ordered by the Court are implemented, including by Israel, the occupying power. This is a binding legal obligation.”

“The ICJ order is an important reminder that no state is above the law. It should serve as a wake-up call for Israel and actors who enabled its entrenched impunity.” he added.

Amnesty International’s response

Amnesty International sees the ICJ’s decision as crucial for protecting Palestinians in Gaza. The ruling underscores the urgent need for an immediate ceasefire. It emphasizes implementing provisional measures to end civilian suffering with an immediate ceasfire.

Also Read: Renowned Palestinian photojournalist Motaz Azaiza evacuates Gaza

Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International, stated that today’s decision by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to order provisional measures in response to South Africa’s genocide case against Israel is an important step. It could help protect the Palestinian people in the occupied Gaza Strip from further suffering and irreparable harm.

Background of the Case

The case against Israel at the ICJ under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was brought by South Africa on December 29, 2023. The allegations of genocide against the Palestinian people stem from attacks on October 7, 2023, by Hamas and other armed groups. These attacks resulted in the deaths of nearly 1,200 people, mostly civilians, in Israel, with some 240 taken hostage. Hearings on South Africa’s request for provisional measures occurred in The Hague on January 11 and 12, 2024.

The 84-page filing by South Africa accuses Israel of acts and omissions “genocidal in character.” These acts are committed with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as part of the broader Palestinian national, racial, and ethnical group.

Israel’s legal obligation to comply

As a member state of the United Nations and a signatory to various international treaties, including the Genocide Convention, Israel is legally bound to comply with the rulings of the International Court of Justice. According to Article 94 of the UN Charter, judgments of the ICJ are binding on the parties to the dispute, and failure to comply may result in measures imposed by the UN Security Council.

Israel rejects ICJ’s ruling

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejects the decision by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), saying that it will continue with the war to defend itself while adhering to the international law.