The International Court of Justice ruled on Friday that Israel must immediately halt its military offensive in the southern Gaza city of Rafah, dealing another blow to the country as it faces growing international isolation.
The court has no means to enforce its orders, and Israel said the language of the ruling leaves some room for interpretation. Hardline politicians in Israel immediately promised that Israel would not comply.
However, the 13-2 ruling puts more pressure on the Netanyahu government over the conduct of the war. Gaza authorities say at least 35,000 people have been killed, with no distinction between fighters and civilians, and hundreds of thousands have been forced to flee repeatedly to avoid Israeli shelling, which has devastated much of the enclave.
“The Court finds that, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, Israel must immediately stop its military offensive and any other actions in Rafah governorate, which could impose living conditions on the Palestinian group in Gaza that could lead to to their physical destruction. . in whole or in part,” said the president of the court, Nawaf Salam, reading the sentence.
The ruling is the latest in a series of rebukes aimed at Israel for the conduct of its war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
The Court underlined the need for “all interested parties to provide without hindrance the urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance”, including the maintenance of open land crossings and, in particular, the Rafah crossing, which Israel has seized several two weeks. does. He ordered Israel to “immediately take all effective measures to ensure and facilitate free access” for UN investigators to Gaza. The judges also ordered Israel to submit a report within a month on the measures taken to implement the decision.
Last week a South African legal team urged the International Court of Justice, the United Nations Supreme Court, to impose further restrictions on Israel’s incursion into Rafah, saying it was “the latest step in the destruction of Gaza and its people ”.
The Israeli army said it had conducted a precise and targeted offensive against Hamas in Rafah since early May and was fighting in neighborhoods close to the heart of the city. More than a million people who fled other parts of Gaza have found refuge in Rafah, but most have fled this month.
Israel’s deputy attorney general for international law, Gilad Noam, and other Israeli lawyers rejected the allegations in court last week, calling South Africa’s case an “inversion of reality.”
In a statement, the Israeli government said its military “has not and does not intend” to take actions that would lead to the partial or total destruction of Rafah’s civilian population. In fact, he said the court’s decision had no bearing on the Israeli offensive. because the military is not committing the prohibited acts.
Satellite images of Rafah on May 22 showed damage and evictions extending about four miles into Gaza, from the border with Israel toward central Rafah.
Source: Planet Labs satellite imagery
Some far-right allies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denounced the court order and suggested that Israel should not comply with it. “There should be only one answer: the conquest of Rafah, the intensification of military pressure and the complete annihilation of Hamas until total victory is achieved,” National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said in a statement.
Adil Haque, a law professor at Rutgers Law School, said the ruling limits Israel’s offensive in and around Rafah but leaves some room for it to defend itself.
“Large-scale military operations in and around Rafah are probably out of the question because they will lead to mass death and displacement of civilians,” he said. “But targeted operations to specifically respond to rocket fire or to rescue hostages, in principle, should still be on the table.”
“Israel can take the legally safe route and keep its operations strictly limited,” he added, “or it can take the legally risky route and test the court’s patience.”
Dire Tladi, a South African judge on the court, clarified in a separate opinion that “legitimate defensive actions, within the strict confines of international law, to repel specific attacks,” would be consistent with the court’s ruling. But “the continuation of the offensive military operation in Rafah and elsewhere” will not.
South Africa argued that Israel’s control of two major border crossings in southern Gaza, at Rafah and Kerem Shalom, prevented sufficient aid from arriving, plunging Gaza into “unprecedented levels of humanitarian need.” According to UN data, few humanitarian trucks are entering, but many commercial trucks – carrying goods to sell rather than distribute for free – have entered the enclave.
The hearings are part of South Africa’s case, filed in December, accusing Israel of genocide, which Israel strongly denies. In late January, the court ordered Israel to do more to prevent acts of genocide, but stopped short of calling for a ceasefire. The main part of the case, which concerns genocide, is not expected to begin until next year.
In March, in its strongest language, the court ordered Israel to stop impeding humanitarian aid to Gaza as severe hunger spread there, to open more border crossings for supplies and to provide “full cooperation” with the United Nations.
Judge Salam said the situation in Gaza had worsened since March and now “must be described as disastrous”.
Israel launched its military operation in retaliation for the October 7 attacks that officials say killed 1,200 people and led to the kidnapping of about 250 others in Gaza. The court reiterated its call for the “immediate and unconditional release” of hostages still held by Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza.
Lauren Leatherby contributed to reporting.