ICJ Judgment On Israel

Jurisdiction 

The Court began by addressing the issue of whether it has the authority to provide the advisory opinion. It stated that the Court must satisfy itself that the matter on which it is asked to provide a decision is a "legal question," in compliance with the mandate in Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of its Statute.
The Court observed that the questions before it concerned the legal fallout from specific actions taken by Israel as an occupying force during its hostile possession of the territory since 1967. Second, they have to do with how these policies and practices impact the occupation's legal position in relation to specific international legal norms and principles, as well as the legal ramifications that follow from this status. The Court concluded that these are legal inquiries. Taking everything into consideration, the Court determined that it has jurisdiction to provide the desired opinion because the request was submitted in compliance with the terms of the Court's statute and the Charter.

Judgment 

• The top UN court issued an unprecedented, broad criticism of Israel's authority over the lands it took 57 years ago, declaring that Israel's position in the occupied Palestinian territories is illegal and urging an immediate end to settlement expansion.
• The judges cited a long list of actions that they claimed violated international law, including the establishment and growth of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem, the utilisation of the region's natural resources, the annexation and imposition of permanent control over lands, and discriminatory measures against the Palestinian people.
• The 15-judge panel of the International Court of Justice swiftly released a nonbinding ruling, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu swiftly condemned, claiming that the disputed lands constitute a part of the historical homeland of the Jewish people.
• In a broad and damning advisory opinion, the UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ) declared that Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories violates international law and ordered Israel to end it "as rapidly as possible" and provide full reparations for its "internationally wrongful acts."
• The court found many violations of international law by Israel, including actions that amounted to apartheid, in a historic ruling that is not legally binding.
• The court stated that Israel's violations of the laws against annexing land by force and of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination directly affect Israel's ability to remain an occupying force in the occupied Palestinian territory.
• Israel's continuous abuse of its position as an occupying power, including its annexation of Palestinian territory, its claim of permanent control over it, and its persistent denial of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and