International Court of Justice (ICJ): While considering the request made by United Nations General Assembly to give an advisory opinion on obligations of Israel in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, other International Organizations and Third States in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory; the ICJ unanimously opined that the State of Israel, as an occupying Power, is required to fulfil its obligations under international humanitarian law. The ICJ further opined that the obligations include the following:
-
It was unanimously opined that the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory has the essential supplies of daily life, including food, water, clothing, bedding, shelter, fuel, medical supplies and services.
-
With a ratio of 10:1, the ICJ opined that Israel is obliged to agree to and facilitate by all means at its disposal relief schemes on behalf of the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory so long as that population is inadequately supplied, as has been the case in the Gaza Strip, including relief provided by the United Nations and its entities, in particular the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, other international organizations and third States, and not to impede such relief.
-
The ICJ unanimously stated that Israel is obliged to respect and protect all relief and medical personnel and facilities;
-
The ICJ unanimously opined that Israel is obliged to respect the prohibition on forcible transfer and deportation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
-
Israel is obligated to respect the right of protected persons from the Occupied Palestinian Territory who are detained by the State of Israel to be visited by the International Committee of the Red Cross;
-
The ICJ stated unanimously that Israel is obliged to respect the prohibition on the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare;
-
With a ratio of 10:1, the ICJ opined that as an Occupying Power, the State of Israel has an obligation under international human rights law to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including through the presence and activities of the United Nations, other international organizations and third States, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
-
With a ratio of 10:1, the ICJ stated that the State of Israel has an obligation to co-operate in good faith with the United Nations by providing every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, including the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
-
The ICJ with a ratio of 10:1, opined that the State of Israel has an obligation under Article 105 of the Charter of the United Nations to ensure full respect for the privileges and immunities accorded to the United Nations, including its agencies and bodies, and its officials, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
-
With a ratio of 10:1, the ICJ opined that the State of Israel has an obligation under Article II of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations to ensure full respect for the inviolability of the premises of the United Nations, including those of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, and for the immunity of the property and assets of the Organization from any form of interference.
-
With a ratio of 10:1, the ICJ opined that the State of Israel has an obligation under Articles V, VI and VII of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations to ensure full respect for the privileges and immunities accorded to the officials and experts on mission of the United Nations, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Background:
For the purposes of this Advisory Opinion, the Court referred to certain events that took place in the Gaza Strip between 2005 and 2023, as well as to its findings in its 2024 Advisory Opinion and to resolution ES-10/24 adopted by the General Assembly on 18-9-2024. The Court noted that the United Nations, and particularly the General Assembly, became involved in the provision of humanitarian assistance to Palestine refugees.
Following the 1967 armed conflict, known as the “Six-Day War”, and the start of the occupation by Israel of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, a provisional agreement between UNRWA and Israel was concluded, on 14-6-1967, concerning assistance to Palestine refugees in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (“1967 Agreement”). The 1967 Agreement provided that “UNRWA would continue its assistance to Palestine refugees, with the full co-operation of Israeli authorities, in the West Bank and Gaza Strip areas”, and that Israel would facilitate the task of UNRWA to the best of its ability, and set out a number of undertakings made by Israel. By resolution 2252 (ES-V) of 4-7-1967, the General Assembly enlarged the mandate of UNRWA to include assistance to persons displaced as a result of the 1967 hostilities.
on 7-10-2023, Hamas and other armed groups present in the Gaza Strip carried out attacks in Israel, killing more than 1,200 people, injuring thousands and abducting 251, some of whom continued to be held hostage for more than two years. Following these attacks, Israel launched a large-scale military operation in the Gaza Strip, by land, air and sea, which has caused massive casualties, including the death of tens of thousands of civilians, a large number of whom were women and children, extensive destruction of civilian infrastructure and the repeated displacement of the overwhelming majority of the civilian population in the Gaza Strip. In the course of its military campaign, Israel has substantially restricted — and for significant periods of time, including between March and May 2025, completely prevented — the entry of aid (including food and water) into the Gaza Strip and its distribution to the Palestinian population, with catastrophic consequences for this population. The United Nations reported numerous attacks on school buildings and healthcare facilities in the Gaza Strip operated by the United Nations and others, including school buildings that had been directly hit.
By a letter dated 3-11-2024, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel informed the President of the UN General Assembly that Israel had withdrawn its request to UNRWA to provide humanitarian assistance to Palestinians pursuant to the 1967 Agreement. According to Israel, the 1967 Agreement was terminated.
Israel did not allow any aid to reach the Gaza Strip from 2-3-2025 until 18-5-2025. Since 19-5-2025, the Israeli authorities have allowed the United Nations to resume the delivery of limited aid into the Gaza Strip. The United Nations and the observer State of Palestine have, however, alleged that Israel has continued to impose substantial restrictions on the entry and distribution of aid and commercial goods into the Gaza Strip.
On 27-5-2025, Israel launched a new aid distribution system, through a private foundation (the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation), with only a few distribution points, mainly in southern Gaza. The United Nations, other international organizations and humanitarian non-governmental organizations considered that this new system did not align with humanitarian principles, did not meet people’s needs and put people at risk, and they refused to collaborate with it.
In this backdrop, the UN General Assembly United Nations adopted resolution 79/232 in which, referring to Article 65 of the Statute of the Court, it requested the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on: “What are the obligations of Israel, as an occupying Power and as a member of the United Nations, in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, including its agencies and bodies, other international organizations and third States, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including to ensure and facilitate the unhindered provision of urgently needed supplies essential to the survival of the Palestinian civilian population as well as of basic services and humanitarian and development assistance, for the benefit of the Palestinian civilian population, and in support of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination?”
Court’s Assessment:
The ICJ observed that that the question concerns the identification of the “obligations of Israel”. It was clarified that the General Assembly did not ask the Court to determine the “legal consequences” of any breach of these obligations. Therefore, the Court did not determine whether Israel has violated its legal obligations or to address the legal consequences of Israel’s conduct, including under the law of State responsibility. However, identification of Israel’s legal obligations could not be undertaken in purely abstract terms and requires taking the particular situation underlying the request into account. Thus, the Court based its assessment on the factual situation and identifies Israel’s obligations with the degree of specificity it considers warranted to fulfil its judicial function.
The Court stated that an Occupying Power has a general obligation to administer the territory for the benefit of the local population. Israel’s particular obligations as an Occupying Power in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, other international organizations and third States are governed by international humanitarian law, in particular the law of occupation, and by international human rights law. The Court found that Israel’s obligations under the law of occupation have also increased significantly, commensurate with the increase in its effective control over the territory. When hostilities take place in an occupied territory, the law of occupation applies alongside other rules of international humanitarian law relating to the conduct of hostilities, and the occupying Power must comply with both sets of rules. However, the intensity of the hostilities could affect the implementation of certain obligations under the law of occupation, and therefore the particular conduct required of the occupying Power.
The Court further emphasised that when States take measures to combat terrorism, they must comply with their obligations under international law, in particular their obligations to respect international humanitarian law and international human rights law.
It was observed that the distribution of humanitarian relief in an impartial manner requires considerable planning and co-ordination. Thus, an occupying Power must do more than simply allow the passage of essential items into the occupied territory. It must also use all means at its disposal so that these items are distributed in a regular, fair and non-discriminatory manner, including by facilitating access to them and refraining from threats or use of violence or lethal force against the civilian population seeking to access such humanitarian relief. Relief schemes must be carried out in a manner that respects the dignity of the local population and that is consistent with the protection of the human rights of that population.
In light of the evidence in the case file, the Court further found that the local population in the Gaza Strip has been inadequately supplied within the meaning of Article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. In such a situation, Israel, as the occupying Power, has an obligation to agree to and facilitate relief schemes under that provision.
The ICJ recalled that Israel’s territorial claim over East Jerusalem has long been declared “null and void” by the Security Council. As an occupying Power, Israel must refrain from extending its domestic laws to the occupied territory in any manner inconsistent with its obligation not to impede the Palestinian people from exercising its right to self— determination, including its inalienable right to territorial integrity over the entirety of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
It was stated that the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip poses a direct risk to the living conditions of the Palestinian people. The deprivation of a people of its essential means of subsistence threatens the fundamental conditions that are indispensable for that people to exercise its right to self-determination. Respect for the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people requires Israel not to prevent the fulfilment of the basic needs of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, including by the United Nations, its entities, other international organizations and third States.
The Court lastly reiterated that, ultimately, the realization of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including its right to an independent and sovereign State, living side by side in peace with the State of Israel within secure and recognized borders for both States, as envisaged in resolutions of the Security Council and General Assembly, would contribute to regional stability and the security of all States in the Middle East.
[Obligations Of Israel in Relation to the presence and Activities of the United Nations, Other International Organizations and Third States in and in Relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, In Re, General List No. 196, decided on 22-10-2025]