Israel must ensure basic needs in Gaza are met, says World Court

The United Nations’ top legal body, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Wednesday said that Israel had an obligation to ensure the basic needs of the civilian population in Gaza were met.
 
The panel of 11 judges added in its advisory opinion that Israel should be forced to support the relief efforts provided by the United Nations in the Gaza Strip and its entities, including UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East).
 
“As an occupying power, Israel is obliged to ensure the basic needs of the local population, including the supplies essential for their survival,” presiding judge Yuji Iwasawa said. The judges added that Israel had not substantiated its claims that a significant number of UNRWA’s employees were members of the Hamas terrorist group.
 
The ICJ’s advisory opinions, while non-binding, carry significant weight in shaping international legal norms and state practices.
 
The Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, said on Wednesday that the advisory opinion on UNRWA was “shameful.”

 
“They are blaming Israel for not cooperating with UN organs… They should be blaming themselves. Those organs became breeding grounds for terrorists. Take, for example, UNRWA… an organization that supported Hamas for years,” Danon said.
 
Israel’s Foreign Ministry said it categorically rejected the court’s findings and added, “Israel fully upholds its obligations under international law.”
 
Israel banned UNRWA from operating in Gaza last year, claiming that some of its employees were members of Hamas or other affiliated groups.
 
The ministry on Wednesday repeated claims that UNRWA employs Hamas operatives and stressed it would not cooperate “with an organization that is infested with terror activities.”
 
The advisory opinion was requested by the UN General Assembly in December. The scope of it addresses Israel’s legal obligations to the presence and activities of the UN, other international organizations, and third states in east Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, including examining the extent to which Jerusalem is required to cooperate with those entities in delivering humanitarian aid and facilitating their operations.
 
The UNGA request followed a previous ICJ advisory opinion from July 2024, which declared Israel’s management of east Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Strip unlawful and illegal under international law. It emphasized that Israel must cease its “occupation,” dismantle existing settlements, and refrain from establishing new ones. It also called for reparations for Palestinians who had lost land and property due to Israeli policies.
 
The ICJ found as well, in the July opinion, that Israeli laws and practices in the territories breached the prohibition on racial segregation and apartheid under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), which Israel is a signatory to.
 
Israel firmly rejected this opinion at the time. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it “fundamentally erroneous” and asserted that the court’s opinion was not clear of political motivations and did not reflect the nuanced complexities of the Israeli-Hamas conflict.
 
He also emphasized that Israel’s security concerns necessitated its presence in these areas and that any future resolution should come through direct negotiations, not external legal mandates.
 
Some Israeli legal scholars have further contended that UNGA’s request for an advisory opinion bypassed the authority of the UN Security Council and was politically motivated. In April, lawyers for the UN and Palestinian representatives at the ICJ accused Israel of breaking international law by refusing to let aid into Gaza between March and May.
 
Since then, some humanitarian aid has been allowed in, but UN officials say the relief is nowhere near what is needed to ease a humanitarian disaster.
 
The 20-point ceasefire plan mediated by the US earlier this month allows for 600 trucks of aid a day into Gaza. Israel has previously accused Hamas of stealing food delivered into the enclave and said that the aid restriction was to put pressure on the terrorist group.

The opinion comes amid long-standing tensions between Israel and the World Court, including concerning the issue of facilitating aid into the Strip. The Israel-Hamas War, currently on hold due to a ceasefire, was triggered by the terrorist group’s cross-border massacre attack two years ago, on October 7, 2023. One thousand two hundred people were murdered and 251 were kidnapped and held hostage by Hamas in Gaza.
 
So far, all of the living hostages have been released, but Hamas continues to hold over a dozen bodies of slain hostages, claiming it is having difficulty locating them due to the destruction.
 
The UN said in August last year that nine UNRWA staff members may have been involved in Hamas’s assault on Israel and that they had been fired. Another Hamas commander, confirmed by UNRWA as one of its employees, was killed in Gaza in October 2024, according to Israel.
 
Anne Herzberg, the legal advisor to NGO Monitor, said, “The advisory opinion… is hardly surprising. This opinion was orchestrated by countries hostile towards Israel, including Turkey, Qatar, South Africa, and Norway. The ICJ has been repeatedly exploited as a central means of lawfare, and this abuse has only intensified since… October 7.”
 
She added, “Despite its name, the ICJ is not like a domestic court with robust evidentiary rules and safeguards. It is a UN body, and it relies primarily on unverified evidence provided by other UN agencies and officials.
 
“The court’s opinions generally reflect the biases and political agenda of the UN. The UN and associated mechanisms like the ICJ will do whatever it takes to absolve UNRWA and other UN agencies from any accountability for their role in aiding and abetting Hamas’ military takeover of Gaza and the war,” she said.