The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on Wednesday that Israel must permit the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza. The UN General Assembly sought the court’s opinion after Israel prohibited the UN agency, a key aid provider in Gaza, from operating there. The ICJ stated that Israel is obligated to accept and support relief efforts by the UN and its entities, including UNRWA. Israel, although absent from the court hearings in April, submitted a 38-page document for consideration, denying any violation of international law and criticizing the proceedings as biased.
Advisory opinions from the ICJ hold substantial legal significance and may have wide-ranging implications for the UN and its global missions. Israel’s rejection of the court’s findings was echoed by its Foreign Affairs Ministry on social media, asserting full compliance with international law. The Israeli ambassador to the UN labeled the advisory opinion as “shameful,” blaming UN organs for supporting terrorism, particularly referencing UNRWA’s alleged ties to Hamas.
The ongoing legal dispute predates the recent U.S.-brokered ceasefire in Gaza, aimed at ending the prolonged conflict in the region. Despite occasional strains, such as recent deadly incidents involving Israeli forces and Hamas militants, the ceasefire remains active, with provisions for daily aid deliveries. Hamas confirmed Israel’s compliance with the aid provisions, while the UN announced intentions to escalate aid shipments into Gaza.
Israel’s ban on UNRWA, implemented in January, has drawn criticism from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and allies, alleging Hamas infiltration within the organization. Canada temporarily halted funding for UNRWA in response to these claims, later resuming support following an interim UN report. The vital role of UNRWA in providing humanitarian relief to millions in Gaza and the wider region has been acknowledged by international observers.
The ICJ’s advisory opinions, while non-binding, hold weight in resolving disputes involving UN personnel protections. The court’s past rulings on Israeli policies, including the West Bank barrier and occupation activities, have sparked controversies and unilateral actions. Israel’s dismissal of these opinions continues amidst ongoing legal challenges and international scrutiny.
