On May 2, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concluded public hearings on what the obligations of Israel concern the agencies of the United Nations and other rescue groups to work on the Palestinian territory which it occupies.
A panel of judges has heard oral arguments from 40 countries since Monday, notably China, France, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia and the United Kingdom.
The court will probably deliver for months before rendering a decision, requested in December by the United Nations General Assembly.
Many participating states have reprimanded Israel for restricting humanitarian aid in Gaza in Gaza since the launch of a genocidal war on the enclave on October 7, 2023.
Israel has cut all help – food or medicine – entirely in the past two months, accelerating famine and medical crises.
Here are the main dishes to remember audiences:
Famine threatens the Palestinians as a people
There was a large consensus according to which Israel, as an occupying power, would be forced to allow help organizations to provide assistance to the people it occupies, in particular Gaza, that Israel also bombers.
Israel has weakened human rights standards thanks to its violations in Gaza, Juliette McIntyre, a legal academic from the University of South Australia, argued.
She pointed out that almost all the states that spoke to hearings have said that the capacity of the Palestinians to receive humanitarian relief is necessary for their survival, to keep their right to a possible self-determination and to protect the entire United Nations system and the treaties that underlie it.
In other words, she said that most of the states are suitable that Israel should not be authorized to starve civilians that he occupies or hindered the rescue work of the UN agencies.
“Each state, with the exception of two, is suitable that Israel is an occupant and that it owes certain obligations,” she told Tel Aviv Tribune.
What does Israel say?
Israel submitted written statements that qualified the hearings as “circus” and accused the anti -Semitism court.
In addition to that, he said that he had no obligation to work with what he described as bodies or compromised aid groups and that his sovereign right to “defend himself” is responsible for providing assistance to the people she occupies.
This is not the first time that Israel has refused to attend the CIJ sessions leading to an advisory opinion.
The American Declaration
The United States has defended Israel, said Heidi Matthews, assistant professor by law at York University, Canada.
She added that the United States has tried to deny the seriousness of the situation and to protect Israel from responsibility by deliberately speaking of the facts on the ground.
According to Matthews, while the United States has mainly declared that the CIJ should advise Israel to maintain its legal obligations under international law, it has not provided details on the conduct of Israel or the call for Israel to take concrete measures to mitigate the humanitarian crisis it has created.
“This type of highly formalist approach and factually empty of the law is characteristic of a form of fascist commitment with legal arguments,” Matthews told Tel Aviv Tribune.
The United States has also tried to “scare” the court by evoking the undated allegations of Israel according to which the United Nations Agency for Palestinians (UNRWA) had been infiltrated by Hamas, said Adel Haque, Legal scholar at Rutgers University.
In October 2024, Israel prohibited UNRWA, which helps Palestinians make refugees by Zionist ethnic cleaning which gave way to the Israel Declaration as a state in 1948.
The United States is betting that the court can be influenced, said Haque, and therefore tries to encourage a more “general” advisory opinion.
“Basically, if advisory opinion is made at such a high level of generality, this would say nothing about the conduct of Israel,” he told Tel Aviv Tribune.
More than two million Palestinians in Gaza starve when they face levels of genocidal violence in the hands of Israel.
Are the CIJ cases a substitute for action?
While the advisory opinions of the CIJ reaffirm international laws and standards, its non -binding opinions cannot change facts on the ground, and some countries can seek CIJ opinions rather than taking concrete and coordinated measures against Israel, said Haque.
“Many (European states) are presented to the CIJ in these hearings to say that Israel does not fulfill its obligations. But the question, now, will these states do about it? ” He said to Tel Aviv Tribune.
He noted that the United Kingdom had used recent hearings to denounce the obstruction of aid by Israel and to talk about its decision to stop arms sales in Israel, not enough action, he added.
France has also spoken of the need for Israel to quickly facilitate aid to Gaza.
But the statements seem to be attempts to substitute the collective failure of Europe to take urgent measures against Israel at its conduct in Gaza, Haque said.
“It is the responsibility of the States to decide what they are going to do (the actions of Israel) and not to wait for the court to governs what they already know,” added Haque.
When and how will the ICJ reign?
The ICJ should not issue an advisory opinion for months.
The opinion of a non -binding consultant will probably not force the Israel states or the Member States to change course, according to legal researchers.
Israel ignored the provisional binding measures previous by the CIJ, ordering it to develop humanitarian aid and to put an end to the acts of genocide in Gaza following a case of genocide carried against Israel by South Africa in December 2023.
No state has taken no measure against Israel for having omitted to implement the provisional measures.
McIntyre believes that the Court possibly issuing a close decision which describes Israel’s responsibilities to facilitate aid and cooperate with UNRWA.
As the court issues, tens of thousands of Palestinians may already have hurt to death or have been ethnically cleaned by Israel.
“Consultative opinion will not solve the problem in the field and authentic measures (by states) must be taken,” warned McIntyre.