The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has delivered an interim ruling calling on Israel\u00a0to refrain from impeding the delivery of aid into Gaza and improve the humanitarian situation.<\/p>\n
It also ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide in the besieged enclave and to punish incitement to genocide.<\/p>\n
However, it did not order Israel to halt military operations in Gaza, one of South Africa’s key demands in the case it brought to The Hague earlier this month.<\/p>\n
\nThe court recalls that its orders on provisional measures have binding effect and thus create international legal obligations for any party to whom the provisional measures are addressed”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
the court said on Friday, adding that Israel would be obliged to\u00a0report to the court within a month on what it was doing to uphold the measures.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
It also called for the release of captives taken by Hamas during its 7 October attack in southern Israel.<\/p>\n
While the court is not expected for some time to rule on whether Israel is committing genocide in its war on the besieged enclave, it ruled on Friday on several of the nine interim measures South Africa requested.<\/p>\n
The nine interim measures requested by South Africa included an immediate cessation of military operations in Gaza, preventing forcible displacement of\u00a0Palestinians, ceasing any restrictions on humanitarian aid entering the enclave, refraining from committing genocide and inciting it, and preventing the destruction of evidence of alleged crimes in Gaza.<\/p>\n
The ICJ only has jurisdiction over states, and can therefore give orders to Israel, but not to Hamas, a non-state entity.<\/p>\n
Friday’s ruling by the ICJ is legally binding. However, there is little The Hague-based court can do to enforce compliance.<\/p>\n
States could potentially call on the UN Security Council to implement separate sanctions on Israel if it failed to comply with the ICJ’s orders.<\/p>\n
The Israeli government has previously\u00a0said\u00a0that not even The Hague could stop it from restoring \u201csecurity to both the south and the north\u201d of the country.<\/p>\n
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the ICJ ruling on Friday in a video message.<\/p>\n
He said that the ruling amounted to “discrimination” as Israel was fighting a \u201cjust war like no other\u201d and would continue to \u201cdefend itself”.<\/strong><\/p>\n
Alonso Gurmendi Dunkelberg, a lecturer in International Relations at King’s College London, that the court had:<\/p>\n
stayed within expectations<\/span><\/p>\n
by not ordering a complete ceasefire.<\/p>\n
It did, however, grant several other provisional measures by an overwhelming majority. Thus, its order, while not very detailed and not as specific or bold as some had hoped, is a refutation of Israel\u2019s claim that there is no risk of genocide in Gaza<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
he said.<\/p>\n
\nThis, in itself, is a remarkable development in the conflict<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
An excerpt from the UK Column News Of January 26th<\/strong><\/h2>\n
A commentary by Dr. Piers Robison on the genocide case ruling at the International Court Of Justice sitting in the Hague.<\/p>\n