KEY POINTS
- ICJ says Israel cannot use starvation as a method of warfare.
- Israel must facilitate aid and ensure Gaza’s essential supplies.
- Word court rejects Israel’s claims that UNRWA staff are linked to Hamas.
- Israel’s envoy calls the ruling “shameful” and denies breaching international law.
THE HAGUE, Netherlands: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Wednesday issued an advisory opinion saying Israel, as the occupying power, is under a binding duty under the Geneva Conventions to ensure the “basic needs” of Palestinians in Gaza and to agree to and facilitate relief schemes by the United Nations and humanitarian organisations.
The court — in an opinion read by its president, Judge Yuji Iwasawa — said Israel must allow and assist humanitarian relief operations, including those run by the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
Starvation as method of warfare
The world court found that Gaza had been “inadequately” supplied within the meaning of Article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and stressed that Israel may not use starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare.
“This Court recalls Israel’s obligation not to use starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare,” Judge Iwasawa said.
Court rebuts Israel’s allegations against UNRWA
The ICJ also rejected Israeli claims that a significant number of UNRWA employees were members of Hamas or other armed groups.
“The court finds that Israel has not substantiated its allegations that a significant part of UNRWA’s employees are ‘members of Hamas … or other factions’,” Iwasawa said.
Israel banned UNRWA from operating in Gaza earlier this year after accusing some staff of involvement in the 7 October 2023 attack on Israel.
The court noted investigations that flagged “neutrality-related issues” at UNRWA but said Israel had not provided evidence of staff affiliation with armed groups.
Humanitarian context and aid flows
The ICJ said Israel had severely restricted aid entry following the events of 7 October 2023 and had blocked the delivery of humanitarian and medical supplies from 2 March, allowing only limited amounts to resume as of 19 May.
The World Food Programme (WFP) told the court and reporters that since the ceasefire earlier this month some 530 WFP trucks carrying more than 6,700 tonnes of food had entered Gaza — enough, the agency said, for close to half a million people for two weeks — but warned this fell far short of needs.
The court underscored that Israel’s obligation to facilitate aid is “unconditional” and that security concerns cannot justify a general suspension of humanitarian activities.
“The occupying power may never invoke reasons of security to justify the general suspension of all humanitarian activities in occupied territory,” the opinion said.
Israel criticises ruling; did not appear in hearings
Israel did not participate in the live hearings in April but submitted a 38-page written position to the court.
Ahead of the ruling, Israel’s UN ambassador Danny Danon denounced the advisory opinion as “shameful”, accusing UN institutions the court says must be supported of being “breeding grounds for terrorists”.
An Israeli official had earlier told journalists the case was “an abuse of international law” and said Israel would not cooperate with UNRWA.
The court noted, however, that advisory opinions — while not legally binding in the way judgements in contentious cases are — carry “great legal weight and moral authority” and can shape international practice and political pressure.
Legal and diplomatic implications
The ICJ said its opinion focused on clarifying legal obligations rather than prescribing specific remedies.
Nevertheless, the ruling adds to a growing international legal file concerning Israel’s conduct since October 2023.
In July 2024 the court issued another advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories unlawful.
Separately, the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a Hamas commander, measures Israel rejects.
Legal experts said the ICJ opinion could increase diplomatic pressure on Israel and bolster calls for unrestricted humanitarian access, but noted that enforcement of advisory opinions depends on member states and international bodies.
Reactions from aid agencies and rights groups
UN agencies and humanitarian groups hailed the ruling. The World Health Organization and aid groups have repeatedly warned that Gaza’s health system and food security are near collapse.
The WFP and UNRWA said the court’s findings supported calls for opening all crossings and allowing unfettered aid deliveries.
The ICJ also warned that Israel is bound under international human rights law to respect and fulfil the rights of Palestinians in occupied territory, and reiterated that occupation law does not grant sovereignty to the occupying power.
The United Nations General Assembly requested the advisory opinion last year after Israel’s suspension of UNRWA operations.
