Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory is 'illegal' according to top UN court (2024)

Israel's decades-long occupation of the Palestinian territories is illegal and needs to end "as rapidly as possible", the UN's top court said Friday, July 19. The UN's General Assembly had asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in late 2022 to give an "advisory opinion" on the "legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem".

"The court has found that Israel's continued presence in the Palestinian Territories is illegal," ICJ presiding judge Nawaf Salam said Friday, adding: "Israel must end the occupation as rapidly as possible." "The State of Israel is under the obligation to bring an end to its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible," the judge added.

The ICJ held a week-long session in February to hear submissions from countries following the request – supported by most countries within the assembly. Most speakers during the hearings called on Israel to end its 57-year occupation. They warned a prolonged occupation posed an "extreme danger" to stability in the Middle East and beyond.

But the United States said Israel should not be legally obliged to withdraw without taking its "very real security needs" into account. Israel did not take part in the oral hearings. Instead, it submitted a written contribution in which it described the questions the court had been asked as "prejudicial" and "tendentious".

The Israel-imposed regime in the West Bank and Gaza Strip dates back more than half a century. Several reports by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights have deemed the occupation illegal "due to its permanence and the Israeli government's de facto annexation policies." No judge, however, had so far confirmed this. Although the ICJ's legal opinions are not binding, they do carry considerable political weight, as legal experts like to point out.

The office of Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas welcomed a "historic" decision. "The presidency welcomes the decision of the International Court of Justice, considers it a historic decision and demands that Israel be compelled to implement it," it said in a statement on official Palestinian news agency Wafa. Abbas's office added that it considers "the court's decision a victory for justice, as it confirmed that the Israeli occupation is illegitimate".

The Palestinian foreign ministry called it "a watershed moment for Palestine, for justice and for international law". "Israel is under an obligation to end this illegal colonial enterprise unconditionally, and in our view, that means immediately and totally," it added.

Netanyahu slams decision

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for his part said the ICJ made a "decision of lies" on Friday. Netanyahu led a chorus of condemnation of the UN court's ruling from conservative, far-right and even centrist politicians in Israel. "The Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land – not in our eternal capital Jerusalem, nor in our ancestral heritage of Judea and Samaria" (the occupied West Bank), Netanyahu said in a statement. "No decision of lies in The Hague will distort this historical truth, and similarly, the legality of Israeli settlements in all parts of our homeland cannot be disputed."

Itamar Ben Gvir, the far-right national security minister and an outspoken champion of Jewish settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, said: "The decision in The Hague proves yet again – this is a blatantly anti-Semitic and political organization." "We will not accept moral preaching from them," the minister said in comments sent to Agence France-Presse by a spokesperson. Ben Gvir called for Israel to seek "sovereignty" of the occupied territories through annexation.

Far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich too called for steps towards annexation of the West Bank, posting on social media platform X: "The answer to The Hague – sovereignty now."

Centrist opposition leader Yair Lapid criticized the court's ruling, calling it "disconnected, one-sided, tainted with anti-Semitism and lacking an understanding of the reality on the ground".