On Friday, the International Court of Justice said “Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful”, adding that the regime “is under an obligation” to end it “as rapidly as possible.”
Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East al-Quds, areas Palestinians want for a future independent state, in a 1967 war.
The 83-page advisory opinion read out by court President Nawaf Salam outlined a wide list of policies that it said violated international law, including the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east al-Quds.
“Israel is under obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities and to evacuate all settlers from occupied Palestinian territory,” the court said, adding that the regime must “make reparation for damage caused to all natural and legal persons concerned.”
The ruling urged all states and international organizations, including the United Nations, “not to recognize as legal” the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in occupied Palestinian territory.
According to the opinion, the UN and the Security Council “should consider the precise modalities and further action required to bring to an end as rapidly as possible” to the unlawful presence of Israel in the occupied territory.
In February, a record 52 countries presented arguments at the ICJ, known as the World Court, about the legal ramifications of Israel's actions in the territories.
This case was initiated by a UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution in December 2022, before Israel’s October genocidal war on the Gaza Strip.
Erwin van Veen, a senior research fellow at the Clingendael think tank in The Hague, was quoted by the Associated Press as saying that if the court rules that Israel’s policies in the West Bank and east al-Quds breach international law, it would “isolate Israel further internationally, at least from a legal point of view.”
He noted that such a ruling would “worsen the case for occupation. It removes any kind of legal, political, philosophical underpinning of the Israeli expansion project.”
The case is separate from another ICJ case filed against Israel by South Africa.
South Africa filed a genocide case against Israel in December 2023 over its war on the Gaza Strip. According to South Africa’s application, Israel's actions in Gaza were "genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group."
The ICJ’s final ruling on the broader South African case may take months if not years to rule, but the court can order urgent measures while weighing its decision.
In January, the ICJ, whose orders are legally binding but lack direct enforcement mechanisms, issued an interim ruling, ordering the occupying regime to take all measures to prevent genocide in Gaza, but stopped short of ordering a ceasefire.
In May, the court ordered Israel to halt its offensive in Rafah after South Africa asked the ICJ to order a halt to the war in Gaza, and in the refugee-packed city in particular.
While Israel ignored the ruling, the Friday opinion could add political pressure over Israel’s nine-month-old war against Gaza.
Israel launched the war on Gaza on October 7 after the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas waged the surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against the occupying entity in response to the Israeli regime's decades-long campaign of bloodletting and devastation against Palestinians.
Since the start of the offensive, the Tel Aviv regime has killed at least 38,848 Palestinians and injured 89,459 more. Thousands more are also missing and presumed dead under rubble.
Pivotal moment
Several Palestinian groups have hailed an earlier decision made by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to deem the Israeli regime’s settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank as illegal.
The Palestinian resistance movement Hamas said the decision “affirmed the illegitimacy of the Zionist occupation and the need to end it.”
“We call on the international community to embrace these decisions, bypass the American will [to protect the regime against such decisions], and work to compel the fascist occupation to implement them and comply immediately,” it added.
The Popular Resistance Committees, a coalition of Palestinian resistance groups, welcomed the development, but also underlined the regime’s track record of obstinate non-compliance with such decisions.
“The decisions of the International Court of Justice need a genuine will and real action for their implementation, starting with the imposition of a boycott on the Zionist entity leading to the accountability and punishment of its criminal leaders,” the coalition said.
The Palestinian Mujahideen Movement called the decision “a positive step that contributes to the isolation of the fascist Zionist entity,” describing the Israeli regime’s existence on the Palestinian land as “invalid.”
The group, meanwhile, noted that such decisions “will remain incomplete unless our people gain their freedom, return to their homes from which they were displaced, and rid themselves of the occupation.”
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a major component of the Palestine Liberation Organization umbrella group, also voiced its appreciation of the decision.
“This decision represents a significant development in the positions of international organizations, as it is rare for an international organization to issue such a comprehensive and precise decision in describing the violations and crimes of the occupation in the occupied Palestinian territories,” the front said in a statement.
The front, however, likewise reminded the Israeli regime’s history of consistent refusal to abide by such decisions. It cited Tel Aviv’s brushing off of the orders that had been issued by the court on it to cease its genocidal practices in the Gaza Strip, which has been enduring an Israeli war since October.
The PFLP, therefore, emphasized “the necessity of taking serious and tangible steps to impose justice and end the occupation.”
Speaking to reporters in The Hague, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Maliki hailed the ruling as a "pivotal moment for Palestine, for justice and for international law."
The ruling means that the regime is "obligated to end its colonial project immediately and unconditionally," he said, adding, "all states must now uphold their clear obligations: no aid, no assistance, no complicity, no money, no arms, no trade, no nothing – no actions of any kind to support Israel’s illegal occupation."
Meanwhile, Palestinian ambassador to the UN Riyad Mansour praised the decision as a "significant step" in putting an end to the decades-long occupation of Palestine and attaining the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to self-determination, statehood and the right of return.
Mansour said his team would study the entire opinion and “dissect every sentence.”
“We will consult with an army of friends at the United Nations and in all corners of the globe,” he said, adding, “We will produce a masterpiece of a resolution” at the UN General Assembly.
Press TV