International Court of Justice

Not to be confused with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. courtlegal, international

International Court of Justice  link () Website
Formation	1945
Headquarters	The Hague, Netherlands
Leader	International Court of Justice/President
Type	legal, international
The international court charged with preventing war crimes which is constitutionally unable to carry out its mission as regards the permanent members of the UN security council (and their allies) which are also (more or less) the world's most active weapons producers and wagers of illegal war.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also called the World Court, is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations (UN), which settles disputes between states in accordance with international law and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues. The ICJ is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between countries, with its rulings and opinions serving as primary sources of international law (subject to Article 59 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice).

Background

Established in 1945 by the UN/Charter, the Court began work in 1946 as the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice.

Current Members

The ICJ comprises a bench of fifteen Judges, each elected to a nine-year term of office by the United Nations General Assembly and the UN Security Council. Members of the Court are independent Judges whose first task, before taking up their duties, is to make a solemn declaration in open court that they will exercise their powers impartially and conscientiously.

When engaged in the business of the Court, ICJ Members enjoy privileges and immunities comparable with those of the head of a diplomatic mission. In The Hague, the President takes precedence over the doyen of the diplomatic corps, who is followed by the Vice-President, after which precedence alternates between Judges and Ambassadors. Each Member of the Court receives an annual salary consisting of a base salary (which, for 2023, amounts to US$191,263 and post adjustment, with a special supplementary allowance of US$25,000 for the President. On leaving the Court, Judges receive an annual pension which, after a nine-year term of office, is equal to half the annual base salary.

• President Yuji Iwasawa

Japan

Member of the Court since 22 June 2018; re-elected as from 6 February 2021. President of the Court from 3 February 2025 to 5 February 2027

• Vice-President Julia Sebutinde

Uganda

Member of the Court since 6 February 2012; re-elected as from 6 February 2021; Vice-President of the Court as from 6 February 2024

• Judge Peter Tomka

Slovakia

Member of the Court since 6 February 2003; re-elected as from 6 February 2012 and as from 6 February 2021; Vice-President of the Court from 6 February 2009 to 5 February 2012; President of the Court from 6 February 2012 to 5 February 2015

• Judge Ronny Abraham

France

Member of the Court since 15 February 2005; re-elected as from 6 February 2009 and as from 6 February 2018; President of the Court from 6 February 2015 to 5 February 2018

• Judge Mohamed Bennouna

Morocco

Member of the Court since 6 February 2006; re-elected as from 6 February 2015

• Judge XUE Hanqin

China

Member of the Court since 29 June 2010; re-elected as from 6 February 2012 and as from 6 February 2021; Vice-President of the Court from 6 February 2018 to 8 February 2021

• Judge Dalveer Bhandari

India

Member of the Court since 27 April 2012, re-elected as from 6 February 2018

• Judge Georg Nolte

Germany

Member of the Court since 6 February 2021

• Judge Hilary Charlesworth

Australia

Member of the Court since 5 November 2021

• Judge Leonardo Nemer Caldeira Brant

Brazil

Member of the Court since 4 November 2022

• Judge Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo

Mexico

Member of the Court since 6 February 2024

• Judge Sarah H. Cleveland

United States of America

Member of the Court since 6 February 2024

• Judge Bogdan-Lucian Aurescu

Romania

Member of the Court since 6 February 2024

• Judge Dire Tladi

South Africa

Member of the Court since 6 February 2024

Zionist Chess in 2025

In January 2025, Craig Murray posted on X:

The US, France, Saudi strongarm in General Aoun as President of Lebanon Aoun appoints International Court of Justice President Nawaf Salam as PM.

Christian Zionist evangelical fanatic Julia Sebutinde of Uganda to be new President of ICJ. The only Judge to vote for Israel on all counts in preliminary Genocide hearings.

It does matter. The President has a lot of power on scheduling, time allocation, witnesses, admissibility and the whole conduct of proceedings. Can screw things up.

On 4 March 2025, Murray posted:

This is good news.

ICJ PRESS RELEASE: HE Judge Yuji Iwasawa (Japan) was today elected President of the ICJ by his peers, for a term expiring on 5 February 2027.

Judges ad hoc

Judges ad hoc are appointed by litigant countries when their cases come before the Court. For example:

• Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation: 32 States intervening)

Ukraine: Mr Yves Daudet

• Proceedings instituted by South Africa against the State of Israel on 29 December 2023

South Africa: Mr Dikgang Ernest Moseneke

Israel: Mr Aharon Barak

The ICJ President decides whether a permanent Judge has to stand down temporarily to make way for a Judge ad hoc.

Israel and the OPT

On 30 December 2022, ten months before the 2023-2024 Israel-Hamas War began, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/77/247 requesting the ICJ to answer these questions in relation to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT):

"(a) What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures?

"(b) How do the policies and practices of Israel referred to in paragraph 18 (a) above affect the legal status of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all States and the United Nations from this status?”

Genocide in Gaza

Watch on YouTube

South Africa accuses Israel of genocide

On 11 January 2024, the Republic of South Africa presented its case to the ICJ accusing the State of Israel of committing actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory of Gaza that are "genocidal in character" against the Palestinian people.

Faced with a toll of more than 22,100 people killed between mid-October and 3 January in Gaza, Pretoria invoked “its rights and obligations” to prevent genocide and “protect the Palestinians of Gaza from destruction”. These rights and obligations are exercised within the framework of the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Concluding a 3-hour sitting of the Court, South Africa's Ambassador at The Hague Vusi Madonsela called upon the ICJ to order Israel to:

Cease all military activities in the OPT;

Stop killing and causing serious mental and physical harm to the Palestinian people in Gaza;

Stop deliberately imposing living conditions intended to bring about their physical destruction as a group; and,

Allow access to humanitarian aid.

On 12 January 2024, Israel presented its case. The Israeli delegation was led by Mr Gilad Noam, Deputy Attorney General for International Law, Ministry of Justice of the State of Israel, Mr Tal Becker, Legal Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Israel, and Ms Tamar Kaplan Tourgeman, Principal Deputy Legal Adviser of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State of Israel, as Co-Agents.

Israel responded: “In accordance with Article 60, paragraph 2, of the Rules of Court, for the reasons given during the hearing of 12 January 2024 and any other reasons the Court might deem appropriate, the State of Israel hereby requests the Court to:

Reject the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by South Africa; and

Remove the case from the General List.”

The ICJ said in a statement on Wednesday 24 January 2024 that the 17-Judge panel will announce its response to South Africa’s requests in Court on January 26:

On Friday 26 January 2024, the ICJ will deliver its Order on the Request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by South Africa in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel). A public sitting will take place at 1 p.m. at the Peace Palace in The Hague, during which Judge Joan E. Donoghue, the President of the Court, will read the ICJ’s Order.

On 26 January 2024, the ICJ delivered its Order on South Africa’s request.

Further developments

On 23 January 2024, Nicaragua, referring to Article 62 of the Statute of the Court, filed in the Registry of the Court an Application for permission to intervene “as a party” in the case.

On 16 February 2024, the Court issued its decision on South Africa’s request for additional provisional measures dated 12 February 2024.

On 28 March 2024, the Court indicated additional provisional measures, following a request from South Africa, dated 6 March 2024, for the indication of additional provisional measures and/or the modification of its Order of 26 January 2024.

On 5 April 2024, Colombia, invoking Article 63 of the Statute of the Court, filed in the Registry of the Court a declaration of intervention in the case.

On 10 May 2024, Libya, invoking Article 63 of the Statute of the Court, filed in the Registry of the Court a declaration of intervention in the case.

On 10 May 2024, South Africa filed an urgent request with the Court for the indication of additional provisional measures and the modification of provisional measures previously prescribed by the Court.

On 13 May 2024, Egypt announced it will join South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the ICJ.

On 16 and 17 May 2024, the ICJ will hold hearings on South Africa's request of 10 May for the indication of additional provisional measures & the modification of measures previously prescribed by the Court in the case South Africa v Israel.

On 24 May 2024, the ICJ issued Summary Judgment 2024/6 which, inter alia, stated:

"Israel must immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part."

ICJ Advisory Opinion

Responding to UNGA resolution A/RES/77/247, the ICJ issued on Friday 19 July 2024 its Advisory Opinion which found that Israel’s decades-long occupation of the Palestinian territories was “unlawful”, and that its “near-complete separation” of people in the occupied West Bank breached international laws concerning “racial segregation” and “apartheid.”

Delivering the court’s findings, ICJ President Nawaf Salam said that Israel must make reparations to Palestinians for damages caused by its occupation, adding that the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly and all states have an obligation to not recognise Israel’s occupation as legal.

A detailed summary of the ICJ's Advisory Opinion is recorded here.

A US State Department spokesman said:

“We are concerned that the breadth of the court’s opinion will complicate efforts to resolve the conflict and bring about an urgently needed just and lasting peace, with two states living side-by-side in peace and security.”

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who is also the minister in charge of settlement expansion in the West Bank, has called on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to formally annex the territory in response to the ICJ ruling.

US vetoes enforcement

In 1986, after the court ruled that the United States's covert war against Nicaragua violated international law, the US simply withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction. Although Chapter XIV of the UN Charter authorises the Security Council to enforce court rulings, such enforcement is subject to the veto power of the five permanent members of the council, so the United States simply vetoed enforcement of the case, allowing it to avoid the effective sanction of the ICJ.

The court has ignored obvious evidence of illegality in connection with the 2003 Iraq War, notably when the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission found Tony Blair and a bunch of US government officials guilty of war crimes.

Ruling on Kosovo

In its Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, the ICJ concluded that the declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo in its precise historical circumstances "did not violate any applicable rule of international law". The declaration of independence thus set a precedent that could apply to other separatist movements.