Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly denounced the nonbinding opinion issued by the 15-judge panel of the International Court of Justice, saying the territories are part of the Jewish people’s historic “homeland.” But the resounding breadth of the decision could impact international opinion and fuel moves for unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state.
The judges pointed to a wide list of policies, including the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem, use of the area’s natural resources, the annexation and imposition of permanent control over lands and discriminatory policies against Palestinians, all of which it said violated international law.
The court said Israel had no right to sovereignty in the territories, was violating international laws against acquiring territory by force and was impeding Palestinians’ right to self-determination. It said other nations were obliged not to “render aid or assistance in maintaining” Israel’s presence in the territories. It said Israel must end settlement construction immediately and that existing settlements must be removed, according to a summary of the more than 80-page opinion read out by court President Nawaf Salam.
Israel’s “abuse of its status as the occupying power” renders its “presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful,” the court said, saying its presence must be ended as “rapidly as possible.”
The court’s opinion, sought by the UN General Assembly after a Palestinian request, came against the backdrop of Israel’s devastating military assault on Gaza, which was triggered by the Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7. In a separate case, the International Court of Justice is considering a South African claim that Israel’s campaign in Gaza amounts to genocide, a claim that Israel vehemently denies.
The court said the General Assembly and Security Council — where staunch Israeli ally the United States holds a veto — should consider “the precise modalities” to end Israel’s presence in the territories.
Israel, which normally considers the United Nations and international tribunals as unfair and biased, didn’t send a legal team to the hearings. Instead, it submitted written comments, saying that the questions put to the court are prejudiced and fail to address Israeli security concerns. Israeli officials have said the court’s intervention could undermine the peace process, which has been stagnant for more than a decade.
“The Jewish people are not conquerors in their own land — not in our eternal capital Jerusalem and not in the land of our ancestors in Judea and Samaria,” Netanyahu said in a statement issued by his office, using the biblical terms for the West Bank. “No false decision in The Hague will distort this historical truth and likewise the legality of Israeli settlement in all the territories of our homeland cannot be contested.”
Speaking outside the court, Riad Malki, an adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, called the opinion “a watershed moment for Palestine, for justice and for international law.”
He said other nations must now “uphold the clear obligations” outlined by the court. “No actions of any kind ... to support Israel’s illegal occupation.”
Hamas welcomed the court’s decision and said in a statement that “serious steps on the ground” need to be taken in response.
Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians seek all three areas for an independent state.
Israel considers the West Bank to be disputed territory, whose future should be decided in negotiations, while it has moved populations there in settlements to solidify its hold. It has annexed east Jerusalem in a move that isn’t internationally recognized, while it withdrew from Gaza in 2005 but maintained a blockade of the territory after Hamas took power in 2007. The international community generally considers all three areas to be occupied territory.
The court’s decision strikes at the heart of the ambiguity of Israel’s administration of the territories. Israel hasn’t annexed the West Bank — though settler groups have pressed it to do so — but it calls it part of its homeland and has effectively treated it as an extension of the nation. Along with the settlements, it has appropriated large swaths of the territory as “state lands.” At the same time, Netanyahu’s government has repeatedly rejected the creation of any Palestinian state. Abbas’ Palestinian Authority has been restricted to control over divided enclaves scattered around the West Bank.
The Palestinians presented arguments at hearings in February, along with 49 other nations and three international organizations. In the hearings, Malki accused Israel of apartheid and urged the United Nations’ top court to declare that Israel’s occupation of lands sought by the Palestinians is illegal and must end immediately and unconditionally for any hope for a two-state future to survive.
Erwin van Veen, a senior research fellow at the Clingendael think tank in The Hague, said before the decision that a ruling that Israel’s policies breach international law would “isolate Israel further internationally, at least from a legal point of view.”
He said such a ruling would remove “any kind of legal, political, philosophical underpinning of the Israeli expansion project.” It could also increase the number of countries that recognize a Palestinian state, in particular in the Western world, following the recent example of Spain and Norway and Ireland, he said.
It’s not the first time the ICJ has been asked to give its legal opinion on Israeli policies. Two decades ago, the court ruled that Israel’s West Bank separation barrier was “contrary to international law.” Israel boycotted those proceedings, saying they were politically motivated.
Israel says the barrier is a security measure. Palestinians say the structure amounts to a massive land grab, because it frequently dips into the West Bank.
The court said that Israel’s construction of settlements in the West Bank violated international laws prohibiting countries from moving their population into territories they occupy.
Israel has built well over 100 settlements, according to the anti-settlement monitoring group Peace Now. The West Bank settler population has grown by more than 15 percent in the past five years to more than 500,000 Israelis, according to a pro-settler group. Their residents are Israeli citizens governed by domestic law and served by government ministries, services, banks and other businesses — effectively integrating them into Israel.
Israel also has annexed east Jerusalem and considers the entire city to be its capital. An additional 200,000 Israelis live in settlements built in east Jerusalem that Israel considers to be neighborhoods of its capital. Palestinian residents of the city face systematic discrimination, making it difficult for them to build new homes or expand existing ones.
The international community considers all settlements to be illegal or obstacles to peace since they are built on lands sought by the Palestinians for their state.
Netanyahu’s hard-line government is dominated by settlers and their political supporters. Netanyahu has given his finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, a former settler leader, unprecedented authority over settlement policy. Smotrich has used this position to cement Israel’s control over the West Bank by pushing forward plans to build more settlement homes and to legalize outposts.
A leading South African judge said that “hardly anything” will deter Israel’s Gaza offensive, but Pretoria’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice remains vital to highlight the dire situation.
South Africa’s case brought in December 2023 alleges that Israel’s Gaza offensive, launched in retaliation for an unprecedented Hamas attack on Israel, breached the 1948 UN Genocide Convention. Israel has strongly denied the accusation.
In an interview with AFP, Nambitha Dambuza, a judge of appeal in the Supreme Court of South Africa, lamented that Israel faces few constraints in prosecuting its war.
“The cause of the state concerned, Israel, is so deep and they’re convinced they’re in the right and they know there’s hardly anything that’s going to happen if they continue with their conduct,” Dambuza said.
“Accountability can be a choice among states and I’m not saying all states are the same. Some are more sensitive to pressure, and they might adjust their conduct accordingly, but others will not,” added Dambuza who was in New York for the UN’s High Level Political Forum.
South Africa’s case, which Spain said last month it would join along with several Latin American nations, has resulted in several rulings against Israel.
Last month the ICJ ordered Israel to ensure “unimpeded access” to UN-mandated investigators to look into allegations of genocide.
In a ruling on January 26, the ICJ also ordered Israel to do everything it could to prevent acts of genocide during its military operation in Gaza.
South Africa has gone to the ICJ several times arguing that the dire humanitarian situation means the court should issue further fresh emergency measures.
On May 24, the court ordered Israel to immediately halt its military offensive in the city of Rafah and keep open the key border crossing there for unhindered humanitarian aid.
It also called for the unconditional release of hostages taken by Palestinian militant group Hamas during its October 7 assault that sparked the war.
While ICJ rulings are legally binding, the court has no concrete means to enforce them. Dambuza said that even bringing the case publicized the situation and drew attention to the alleged violations.
“It did bring pressure,” she said. “Although the process didn’t result in any tangible relief... putting these issues out in the public, society gets to see justice — or attempts at justice.”
The war was sparked by Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel, which resulted in the deaths of 1,194 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on Israeli official figures.
The militants also seized hostages, 116 of whom remain in Gaza, including 42 the military says are dead.
Israel’s retaliatory military offensive has killed at least 38,345 people in Gaza, also mostly civilians, according to the Hamas-run territory’s health ministry.
Turning to ecological problems, Dambuza, chair of the Africa Judicial Network on Environmental Law, called for an international environmental court to be set up.
She also said traditional courts, which are run by community leaders and are common in rural South Africa, had an important role to play in adjudicating environmental disputes globally.
