In a landmark decision, the UN’s highest court has declared Israel’s ongoing presence in occupied Palestinian territories illegal, calling for a swift end to the occupation.

Palestinian leaders hailed the ruling as a pivotal moment in their long struggle for justice, and the global response has overwhelmingly supported the decision.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) handed down a scathing verdict, ordering Israel to terminate its occupation of Palestinian territories “as quickly as possible” and make full reparations for its “internationally wrongful acts.”

The panel of 15 judges from various countries ruled that “Israel’s transfer of settlers to the West Bank and Jerusalem, as well as maintaining their presence there,” violates Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The court found Israel guilty of multiple breaches of international law, including actions amounting to apartheid.

While the ICJ’s advisory opinion isn’t legally binding, it carries significant weight in international law and will erode support for Israel.

The ruling poses a challenge for Israel’s staunchest allies, like the US, as the court advised that other nations are obliged to neither recognise the occupation as lawful nor assist it.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas praised the decision as “historic” and a “victory for justice,” insisting that Israel must be compelled to comply. Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki called it a “watershed moment.”

Israel, having abstained from sending a legal team to the hearings, swiftly condemned the ruling.

The UN General Assembly requested this opinion in 2022, predating Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Although not directly related, it will undoubtedly increase pressure on Israel.

Most participating states urged the court to deem the occupation illegal, while a few, including Canada and Britain, argued against issuing an advisory opinion.

The ICJ’s opinion

Reading the court’s opinion, ICJ President Nawaf Salam said:  “The court considers that the violations by Israel of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force and of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination have a direct impact on the legality of the continued presence of Israel, as an occupying power, in the occupied Palestinian territory.

“The sustained abuse by Israel of its position as an occupying power, through annexation and an assertion of permanent control over the occupied Palestinian territory and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and renders Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful.”

The ICJ highlighted several breaches of international law by Israel, including:

• Forced evictions, widespread home demolitions, and limits on Palestinians’ movement and residency rights.
• The transfer of settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and supporting their continued presence.
• Failing to prevent or punish attacks by settlers on Palestinians.
• Restricting Palestinians’ access to water resources.
• Exploiting natural resources in occupied Palestinian territories.
• Extending Israeli law to the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
  

The panel ordered Israel to swiftly end its occupation and halt all unlawful activities. This includes freezing new settlement construction, repealing laws that perpetuate the occupation, scrapping discriminatory legislation against Palestinians, and reversing attempts to alter the demographic makeup of occupied areas.

Salam outlined Israel’s reparation obligations. It included restitution, compensation and/or satisfaction, defining the former as “Israel’s obligation to return the land and other immovable property, as well as all assets seized from any natural or legal person since its occupation started in 1967, and all cultural property and assets taken from Palestinians and Palestinian institutions, including archives and documents.”

“It also requires the evacuation of all settlers from existing settlements and the dismantling of the parts of the wall constructed by Israel that are situated in the occupied Palestinian territory, as well as allowing all Palestinians displaced during the occupation to return to their original place of residence.”

International response to the ICJ ruling

Muslim-majority nations strongly backed the ruling. Egypt demanded Israel end the occupation, halt settlements, and evacuate existing ones.

Qatar emphasised the ruling’s alignment with international law and reaffirmed its support for Palestinian rights.

Jordan’s Foreign Minister called for an end to Israel’s “impunity” and “war crimes” and that “Israel must be held accountable.”

Malaysia hailed it as a “landmark ruling,” urging all nations to compel Israel’s compliance.

In terms of non-Muslim countries, Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide described the ruling as “crystal clear.”

“Israeli policies and practices are to be considered annexation of large parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and are in violation of international law,” he wrote on X.

Ireland’s Foreign Minister Michael Martin pledged to work with EU and UN partners to implement the court’s “authoritative opinion” and end Israel’s “illegal presence” in occupied Palestine.

Spain said the ruling “includes important pronouncements … on the illegality of the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and on settlements, among other aspects” and urged the international community to act.

South Africa, which has been vocal in its criticism of Israel, said the ruling affirms its long-standing position on the illegality of the occupation.

Meanwhile, the UK took a more cautious stance, stating it “respects the independence of the ICJ” and is reviewing the ruling before issuing an official response. It reiterated its opposition to illegal settlements and settler violence.

The United States, Israel’s key ally, criticised the decision after an initial period of silence.