The International Court of Justice on Friday ordered Israel to “immediately” halt its military offensive on the southern Gaza city of Rafah, dealing another blow to the country as it faces growing international isolation and criticism of its war conduct.
The court has few effective means of enforcing its orders, and it has not ordered a ceasefire in Gaza, with some of the court’s judges arguing that Israel could still conduct some military operations in Rafah under the terms of its ruling.
But the order adds more pressure on the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who faces calls at home and abroad for a ceasefire with Hamas that would lead to the release of hostages held in Gaza .
“The Court considers that, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, Israel must immediately cease its military attacks in Rafah governorate and any other actions that may have an impact on the living conditions of Palestinians in Gaza, thereby causing personal injury.
The Hague-based court also articulated the need to open land border crossings, particularly Rafah, as part of its requirement for the “unhindered provision” of humanitarian aid and services. Israel has controlled the Rafah crossing for more than two weeks, and few aid trucks have entered the enclave since then, according to U.N. data.
The Israeli government said in a statement that its forces “have not and will not” take actions that would lead to the partial or total destruction of the Palestinian population of Rafah. In effect, it said the court’s ruling had no impact on the Israeli attack because the prohibited conduct did not occur.
Hard-line Israeli politicians said Israel should ignore the ruling.
“There should be a response: the conquest of Rafah, the escalation of military pressure, the complete crushing of Hamas until total victory,” far-right National Security Minister Itamar Bengvir said in a statement.
Hamas issued a statement on the Telegram messaging app, welcoming the court order and calling on the international community to pressure Israel to comply. But the court refused to order Israel to completely halt its operations in Gaza, criticized by Palestinian armed groups that led the Oct. 7 attack on Israel that sparked a war that left 1,200 people dead and another 250 abducted to Gaza.
Hamas said other Israeli actions were “as criminal and dangerous as what happened in Rafah”.
The ruling is the latest rebuke of Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Health officials in Gaza say more than 35,000 people have died, many of them women and children, but officials do not distinguish between combatants and civilians. Additionally, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have repeatedly fled parts of the territory to avoid Israeli bombing.
The court order came two days after three European countries – Ireland, Spain and Norway – announced they would recognize the Palestinian state. It comes after the ICC’s chief prosecutor announced on Monday that he was seeking to indict Mr Netanyahu, Israeli Defense Minister Yove Galant and three senior Hamas officials, including the group’s leader in Gaza, Ye Haiya Sinwar) issued an arrest warrant.
Last week, a South African legal team submitted its case against Israel to the International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, urging judges to further limit Israel’s incursion into Rafah, saying it was the “last” attempt to destroy Gaza and its people. step.
Israel’s Deputy Attorney General for International Law, Gilad Noem, and other Israeli lawyers dismissed the charges in court on Friday, saying the South African case “inverted reality.” Mr Noem called the Israeli incursion into Rafah a “limited, localized operation, preceded by evacuation operations and support of humanitarian activities”.
But on Friday, Judge Salam said the court remained unconvinced that Israel’s massive evacuation efforts and humanitarian measures truly protected Palestinian civilians from the “enormous risk” faced by a military attack in Rafah.
Despite international outcry over the mass displacement of Palestinians seeking refuge in Rafah, Israeli officials have vowed to take action in Rafah to dismantle Hamas rule there. But legal analysts say the Israeli military may have some leeway.
Michael Sfard, a prominent Israeli human rights lawyer, said: “This decision does not order a halt to all military operations in Rafah, only those that do not allow Rafah’s life to continue.” “At the same time, “If Israel wants to comply with the ruling, it must significantly scale back its operations.”
The court’s South African judge, Dere Tradi, said “legitimate defensive actions within the strict confines of international law to repel a specific attack” would be consistent with the court’s ruling. But he added that “continuing offensive military operations in Rafah and elsewhere” would not.
“Israel can take a legally safe approach and severely restrict its operations, or it can take a legally risky approach and test the court’s patience,” said Adil Haq, a law professor at Rutgers University School of Law.
Israel said its operation in Gaza’s southernmost city of Rafah was a precision operation targeting Hamas militants holed up there. Escape the city. Israeli officials said the Palestinian armed group had established four battalions in the city before the October 7 attack led by Hamas. Hamas has also built dozens of cross-border tunnels that allow it to smuggle weapons and ammunition under Israeli and Egyptian blockades.
Israel said on Thursday its forces were slowly advancing from the east towards central Rafah, where half the population had been taking refuge before the Israeli military ordered a mass evacuation.
On Friday, the military said its troops had been destroying “weapons storage facilities as well as tunnel shafts.” Hamas also posted a series of updates on its Telegram channel, claiming its armed forces were targeting Israeli forces with mortars and explosive devices in Rafah.
Campaign groups such as Human Rights Watch welcomed the court order. “The ICJ’s order highlights the seriousness of the situation faced by Palestinians in Gaza, who for months have endured a blockade of basic services and humanitarian aid amid ongoing fighting,” said Balkiss, the organization’s deputy director for international justice. Jarrah said.
“Nowhere is safe in Gaza and civilians there are facing famine,” Ms. Jarrah added, “yet the Israeli government continues to ignore binding orders from the World Court and block access to life-saving aid and services.”
Knesset opposition leader Yair Lapid condemned the World Court ruling. But he added that if Netanyahu’s government behaved more responsibly, it “could and should” have prevented the judge from making such a damaging decision.
“A sane and professional government would have prevented ministers from making crazy statements, stopped criminals burning rescue trucks, and conducted quiet and effective political work,” Lapid wrote on social media. “We will not fight this. The government wins together.”
The South African team argued at the World Court that Israel’s control of the two main crossing points in southern Gaza, Rafah and Kerem Shalom, prevented adequate aid from reaching the ravaged enclave, leaving Gaza trapped in “Unprecedented levels of humanitarian need.” “
While few aid trucks have entered Gaza, at least dozens of commercial trucks have arrived from Israeli-operated crossings in northern and southern Gaza. The goods carried by these trucks are for sale rather than for free distribution.
Egypt has agreed to allow fuel and humanitarian aid to be transported from Egypt to Gaza through Kerem Shalom, the White House and Egypt’s president announced on Friday. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s office called it a “temporary measure.” His government initially refused to send trucks to Kerem Shalom, a move that U.S. and Israeli officials said was an attempt to force Israel to abandon Operation Rafah.
The court hearing was part of a case filed by South Africa in December accusing Israel of genocide. On Friday, Israel’s chief of national security staff and foreign ministry spokesman issued a joint statement again refuting the claims, calling them “false, outrageous and disgusting.”
The main case involves genocide charges and is not expected to go to trial until next year.
Richard Perez-Pena, King Abdulrahim and James C. McKinley Jr. Contributed reporting.
