The United Nations announced on Friday that its Secretary-General, António Guterres, will immediately refer an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice to the General Assembly, which had requested the Court’s advice regarding the legal consequences of Israel’s policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem.
A statement issued by the United Nations on behalf of Guterres stated that “it is up to the General Assembly to decide how to proceed in this matter.” Guterres emphasized the necessity for “the parties to re-engage in the long-awaited political path towards ending the occupation and resolving the conflict in accordance with international law, relevant United Nations resolutions, and bilateral agreements.”
Guterres further stated, “The only viable path is the vision of two states – Israel and a fully independent, democratic, contiguous, viable, and sovereign Palestinian state – living side by side in peace and security within internationally recognized and secure borders, based on the pre-1967 lines, with Jerusalem as the capital of both states.”
The International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion also requested the Security Council to take action to end the occupation. Among other things, the opinion stated that “the United Nations, especially the General Assembly, which requested the opinion, and the Security Council, should consider the precise ways and additional measures necessary to achieve this and put an end as soon as possible to the unlawful presence of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories.”
Israel has strongly criticized the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) recent decision, which demands that Israel halt its military offensive in Rafah, Gaza. Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other senior ministers, have expressed their refusal to comply with the ICJ’s orders. They argue that the ICJ’s ruling is influenced by misleading allegations and maintain that their military actions are necessary for national security and are conducted in self-defense against attacks by Hamas.
The Israeli government has labeled the ICJ’s decision as baseless and indicative of bias, highlighting a strong stance against what they perceive as an unjust international scrutiny. This reaction is part of a broader context where Israel often views international legal and political decisions with skepticism, particularly those related to its conflict with the Palestinians.
