Nicaragua v. Germany

Last updated

Nicaragua v. Germany
Seal of the International Court of Justice.png
Court International Court of Justice
Full case nameAlleged Breaches of Certain International Obligations in Respect of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Nicaragua v. Germany)
Started1 March 2024
Claim"Germany is facilitating the commission of genocide and, in any case has failed in its obligation to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide." [1] :  16 
Keywords

On 1 March 2024, Nicaragua instituted proceedings against Germany at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) under, inter alia, the Genocide Convention, concerning Alleged Breaches of Certain International Obligations in Respect of the Occupied Palestinian Territory arising from Germany's support for Israel in the Israel–Hamas war. [2] [1] [3] It sought the indication of provisional measures of protection including the resumption of suspended German funding of the UNRWA and the cessation of military supplies to Israel. [3]

Contents

Background

On 7 October, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups attacked Israel. Israel then invaded Gaza.

South African application

In earlier proceedings before the Court, South Africa alleged that Israel has committed, and is committing, genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, in violation of the Genocide Convention, and places the charges in what it describes as the broader context of Israel's conduct towards Palestinians, including what South Africa described as a 75-year apartheid, 56-year occupation, and 16-year blockade of the Strip. [4] [5] South Africa requested that the ICJ render immediate provisional measures of protection by issuing an order to Israel to immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza. [6] [7]

Israel's Foreign Ministry characterized South Africa's charges as "baseless" [8] and further described South Africa as "functioning as the legal arm" of Hamas. [9] Israel argues that it is conducting a war of self-defence in accordance with international law following the Hamas-led attacks on its territory on 7 October 2023. Approximately 1,200 people, most of them civilians, were killed in these attacks. [10] Israel points to ongoing firing of missiles at civilian population centres, the kidnapping and holding of Israeli hostages in Gaza, [11] [12] and contends that its war cabinet and military authorities directives show no genocidal intent. While acknowledging the high incidence of civilian casualties, Israel attributes them to Hamas and other militant groups using civilian infrastructure as cover for their military assets and operations. [12] Israel asserts compliance with international law and claims to facilitate humanitarian aid into the territory. [10] [13]

The court issued an Order in relation to the provisional measures request on 26 January 2024, in which it ordered Israel to take all measures to prevent any acts that could be considered genocidal according to the 1948 Genocide Convention. [14] [15] [16] The court said "at least some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the [Genocide] Convention". [17] The court did not order Israel to suspend its military campaign in the Gaza Strip, which South Africa had requested. [18] [19] Both South African and Israeli officials welcomed the decision, with each considering it a victory. [20] The court also expressed "grave concern" about the fate of the hostages held in the Gaza Strip [14] and recognized the catastrophic situation in Gaza "at serious risk of deteriorating further" prior to a final verdict. [21]

Proceedings

Nicaragua's application

Jurisdiction

Nicaragua submitted that both it and Germany have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the court in the matter, since the reservations of neither party at the time of their acceptance of that jurisdiction include the present case. [1] : ¶¶ 20–3  Article IX of the Genocide Convention provides for the jurisdiction of the Court in disputes as to the "interpretation, application or fulfilment" of its provisions, and neither Nicaragua nor Germany have stated any reservations under which Article IX falls. [1] : ¶¶ 24–5  Nicaragua further submitted that such a dispute exists. [1] :  26  By a note verbale dated 2 February 2024 to the Federal Foreign Office of Germany, Nicaragua urged Germany to halt arms supplies to Israel and alleged that they could be used in violation of the Genocide Convention, denounced the suspension of funding of the UNRWA as contrary to Germany's obligations under international law, and accused Germany of failing to comply with its obligations under the Genocide Convention. [1] :  27  In the note, Nicaragua said that, in view of its own obligations erga omnes partes, it was prepared to institute proceedings before the Court, and reminded Germany of its own obligations. [1] :  27  Nicaragua claimed that, because Germany "rejected the…contents" of a press release concerning the contents of the note verbale, a dispute exists concerning, inter alia, "the interpretation and application of the Genocide Convention, the Geneva Conventions of 1949", and international law. [1] : ¶¶ 30–1 

Germany's actions

Nicaragua submitted that Germany was aware of "violations being committed by Israel from the moment of their first occurrence" including Israel's alleged intent to "target the civilian population, a clear act of collective punishment". [1] : ¶¶ 39–40  It cited the remarks of the Chancellor of Germany, Olaf Scholz, who said that "Israel's security is a German raison d'État", [1] :  44  supplies of weapons to Israel, [1] : ¶¶ 45, 47, 51, 53, 56  and concerns expressed about harm to Palestinian civilians and a risk of genocide. [1] : ¶¶ 41–3, 48–50, 52, 54–5  It argued that German policy on aid towards Palestinians "increased the vulnerability of the Palestinian population, particularly Gazans, and contributed to the very present risk of irreparable prejudice." [1] :  57  It claimed that Germany suspended funds on the basis of allegedly unreliable Israeli allegations that members of the UNRWA were involved in Hamas's attack of 7 October. [1] : ¶¶ 58–9  Nicaragua submitted that funding for the UNRWA was "relied upon" for the continuation of its work, on which "over two million people [depend]", [1] : ¶¶ 60–3  including for health services, [1] :  62  environmental health, pest control, water quality, education, and microfinance. [1] :  63  Nicaragua cited the UNRWA's warning that suspension of funding could lead to the cessation of its operations "by the end of February", despite the presence of widespread hunger in the Gazan population according to UN reports. [1] : ¶¶ 64–6 

Remedies sought

Nicaragua sought an adjudication and declaration that [1] :  67 

  • in assisting, supplying, and failing to pressure Israel, Germany breached its obligations under the Genocide Convention, Fourth Geneva Convention, its duty to uphold the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people;
  • in suspending funding to the UNRWA, Germany breached its obligations under the Genocide Convention, international humanitarian law, and the Fourth Geneva Convention;
  • in failing to institute proceedings against persons responsible for crimes under international law including war crimes and apartheid, Germany breached its own obligations under international law; and
  • Germany must cease the alleged breaches above, assure their non-repetition, and "make full reparation for the injury caused its internationally wrongful acts[sic]".

Provisional measures

Nicaragua further asked the court to indicate provisional measures pursuant to its own obligations erga omnes. [1] :  68  Nicaragua alleged an "imminent risk of a complete humanitarian catastrophe". [1] :  74  It cited the remarks of Israeli officials, [1] :  70  and UN officials. [1] : ¶¶ 71–3  It submitted that the court had prima facie jurisdiction because of the existence of a dispute between Nicaragua and Germany. [1] :  83–4  Nicaragua further submitted that both it and Germany had, in acceding to the Genocide Convention, "undertaken to prevent genocide", including prohibitions on certain acts and positive duties to seek to prevent such acts. [1] :  86  Nicaragua submitted that there was therefore a "risk of irreparable harm and [an] urgent need to protect the rights of the Palestinian people", that the court had already reached such a conclusion in earlier proceedings instituted by South Africa, [1] :  94  that it had expressed concern that the situation was worsening, [1] :  95  and that its application engaged not only the obligations under the Genocide Convention by which the court was concerned in those proceedings but also "those of convenitional[sic] and customary international law". [1] :  98  Accordingly, it submitted that "the rights Nicaragua seeks to preserve involv[e] the lives of hundreds of thousands of people". [1] :  99 

Nicaragua therefore sought the indication of provisional measures including [1] :  101 

  • the immediate suspension of German aid and military assistance to Israel so far as it could be used in violation of the Genocide Convention or international law;
  • German efforts to ensure that weapons it had already delivered were not used for such purposes; and
  • resumption of German funding of the UNRWA.

The Rules of Court provide that "request[s] for the indication of provisional measures shall have priority over all other cases". [22]

Oral proceedings

On March 15, 2024, the court announced oral arguments would be heard on 8–9 April. [23] Nicaragua presented its case on 8 April. [24] German response was presented the following day.

Provisional measures by the court

On April 26, it was announced that first ruling on provisional measures will be delivered on April 30. [25]

On April 30, the court ruled against provisional measures, though declining to throw out Nicaragua's case, as requested by Germany. [26] [27]

Commentary

Imogen Saunders of the Australian National University wrote that Nicaragua's application was the "first…to allege contribution to the act of genocide rather than the commission of the act itself". [28] Saunders wrote that Nicaragua's case "rests on a finding that genocide is being committed in Gaza", in which case Israel would be an "indispensable third party" to the case; in the absence of an indispensable third party, a case is inadmissible. [28] Saunders suggests that Nicaragua may have intervened in South Africa's proceedings against Israel under Article 62 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice in order to avoid impediments to the admissibility of its case. [28]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Court of Justice</span> Primary judicial organ of the United Nations

The International Court of Justice, or colloquially the World Court, is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between nations, and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues. It is one of the six organs of the United Nations (UN), and is located in The Hague, Netherlands.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime, and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly. The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 152 state parties as of 2022.

The International law bearing on issues of Arab–Israeli conflict, which became a major arena of regional and international tension since the birth of Israel in 1948, resulting in several disputes between a number of Arab countries and Israel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bosnian genocide case</span> 2007 International Court of Justice decision

Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro [2007] ICJ 2 is a public international law case decided by the International Court of Justice.

<i>Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory</i> Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice

The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory of 9 July 2004 is an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in relation to the Israeli West Bank barrier.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kobi Peretz</span> Israel singer

Kobi Peretz, is an Israeli singer who sings in the Mizrahi style.

A provisional measure of protection is the term that the International Court of Justice uses to describe a procedure "roughly equivalent" to an interim order in national legal systems. The order has also been termed in the press as preliminary measures. The carrying out of the procedure is termed indicating the provisional measure of protection. Requests for the indication of provisional measures of protection take priority over all other cases before the ICJ due to their urgency.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Julia Sebutinde</span> Ugandan judge

Julia Sebutinde is a Ugandan jurist. She is currently serving her second term on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) following her re-election on 12 November 2020. She also is the current chancellor of Muteesa I Royal University, a university owned by Buganda kingdom. She has been a judge on the court since March 2012. She is the first African woman to sit on the ICJ. Before being elected to the ICJ, Sebutinde was a judge of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. She was appointed to that position in 2007. On February 6, 2024, Julia Sebutinde was elected Vice-President of the International Court of Justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ofer Cassif</span> Israeli politician

Ofer Cassif is a far-left Israeli politician who has represented Hadash in the Knesset since April 2019.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rohingya genocide case</span> 2019 International Court of Justice case

The Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide , commonly referred to as the Rohingya genocide case, is a case which is currently being heard by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The case was brought forward by the Republic of The Gambia, on behalf of 57 members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in 2019.

<i>Legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory including East Jerusalem</i> International Court of Justice proceeding

Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem is a proceeding in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), stemming from a resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in December 2022, requesting the Court to render an advisory opinion. In January 2023, the ICJ acknowledged a request from the UNGA for an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. Public hearings opened on Monday, 19 February 2024 in The Hague with 52 states and three international organizations participating.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Palestinian genocide accusation</span> Allegations pertaining to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict

The State of Israel has been accused of carrying out or inciting genocide against Palestinians during the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. This accusation has been linked to the conceptualization of Israel as a settler colonial state. Those who believe Israel's actions constitute genocide typically point to the phenomena of anti-Palestinianism, Islamophobia, anti-Arab racism in Israeli society, and they cite the Nakba, the Sabra and Shatila massacre, the blockade of the Gaza Strip, the 2014 Gaza War and the 2023 Israel–Hamas war as instances of genocide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">War crimes in the Israel–Hamas war</span> Violations of the laws of war during the 2023 Israel–Hamas war

Since the start of the Israel–Hamas war on 7 October 2023, the UN Human Rights Council has identified "clear evidence" of war crimes by both Hamas and the Israel Defense Forces. A UN Commission to the Israel–Palestine conflict stated that there is "clear evidence that war crimes may have been committed in the latest explosion of violence in Israel and Gaza, and all those who have violated international law and targeted civilians must be held accountable." On 27 October, a spokesperson for the OHCHR called for an independent court to review potential war crimes committed by both sides.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza</span> Alleged genocide of Palestinians by Israel

There are allegations that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip during the Israel–Hamas war. Various scholars, and the United Nations Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, have cited statements by senior Israeli officials that they argue demonstrate an "intent to destroy" the population of Gaza, a necessary condition for the legal threshold of genocide to be met.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">South Africa's genocide case against Israel</span> 2023-2024 case at the International Court of Justice

South Africa's genocide case against Israel was brought before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 29 December 2023 by South Africa regarding Israel's conduct in the Gaza Strip as part of the Israel–Hamas war. The case is officially known as Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip .

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Namibia–Palestine relations</span> Bilateral relations

Namibia–Palestine relations refer to foreign relations between Namibia and the State of Palestine.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rafah offensive</span> Ongoing Israeli offensive on Rafah

On 6 May 2024, Israel began a military offensive in and around the city of Rafah as part of its invasion of the Gaza Strip during the Israel–Hamas war.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Union reactions to the Israel–Hamas war</span> European Union reaction to Israel-Hamas war

The Israel–Hamas war has had significant effects on some major European Union member countries and institutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Germany–Nicaragua relations</span> Bilateral relations

Germany–Nicaragua relations are friendly and are characterized by the numerous solidarity movements and aid associations in East and West Germany that were formed in the 1970s and 1980s. In 2024 relations became tense after Nicaragua accused Germany of aiding genocide in Palestine.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Argüello Gómez, Carlos J. (1 March 2024). "Application instituting proceedings" (PDF). International Court of Justice.
  2. ↑ "Nicaragua files application to World Court, accusing Germany of complicity in Gaza genocide". Middle East Eye. 1 March 2024.
  3. 1 2 van den Berg, Stephanie (1 March 2024). "Nicaragua files case at World Court against Germany for aiding Israel". Reuters.
  4. ↑ Maupas, Stéphanie (1 January 2024). "Israel-Hamas war: South Africa brings 'genocide' case before international courts". Le Monde.fr. Archived from the original on 6 January 2024. Retrieved 6 January 2024. 'Long years of apartheid'... The South African lawyers have relied on UN reports, reports by Palestinian journalists and research by NGOs, because Israel prevents the international press from entering the Gaza Strip, as well as investigators from the International Criminal Court and the UN Human Rights Commission. They added that this genocide is committed "against a background of apartheid, expulsion, ethnic cleansing, annexation, occupation, discrimination and ongoing denial of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination."
  5. ↑ Powell, Anita (5 January 2024). "South Africa to Take Israel to Top UN Court on Genocide Claim in Gaza". Voice of America . Archived from the original on 6 January 2024. Retrieved 6 January 2024. In the court application, South Africa argues that the treatment of Palestinians also bears strong resemblance to South Africa's own racially motivated apartheid regime, which ended in 1994 with Mandela's election. "It is important," the submission reads, "to place the acts of genocide in the broader context of Israel's conduct towards Palestinians during its 75-year-long apartheid, its 56-year-long belligerent occupation of Palestinian territory and its 16-year-long blockade of Gaza, including the serious and ongoing violations of international law associated therewith, including grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and other war crimes and crimes against humanity."
  6. ↑ The request for provisional measures is made under Article 74 of the Rules of the Court Archived 6 January 2024 at the Wayback Machine , which states that "A request for the indication of provisional measures shall have priority over all other cases."
  7. ↑ "Proceedings instituted by South Africa against the State of Israel on 29 December 2023" (PDF). International Court of Justice . 29 December 2023. Archived from the original on 5 January 2024. Retrieved 5 January 2024. ALT Link
  8. ↑ "Israel: South African genocide claims at ICJ are baseless". The Jerusalem Post. 11 January 2024. Archived from the original on 21 January 2024. Retrieved 22 January 2024.
  9. ↑ "Lior Haiat - Spokesperson of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs". X (formerly Twitter). 11 January 2024. Archived from the original on 17 January 2024. Retrieved 22 January 2024.
  10. 1 2 "War against Hamas in Gaza is act of self-defence, Israel tells world court". UN News. 12 January 2024. Archived from the original on 12 January 2024. Retrieved 21 January 2024.
  11. ↑ "Public sitting 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)" (PDF). International Court of Justice. The Hague. 12 January 2024. p. 14. Retrieved 19 January 2024. ... thousands of Hamas and other militants breached Israeli sovereign territory by sea, land and air, invading over 20 Israeli communities, bases and the site of a music festival. What proceeded, under the cover of thousands of rockets fired indiscriminately into Israel, was the wholesale massacre, mutilation, rape and abduction of as many citizens as the terrorists could find before Israel's forces repelled them. Openly displaying elation, they tortured children in front of parents, and parents in front of children, burned people, including infants, alive, and systematically raped and mutilated scores of women, men and children. All told, some 1,200 people were butchered that day, more than 5,500 maimed, and some 240 hostages abducted, including infants, entire families, persons with disabilities and Holocaust survivors, some of whom have since been executed; many of whom have been tortured, sexually abused and starved in captivity
  12. 1 2 Berman, Lazar (12 January 2024). "Full text of Israel's opening address against South Africa genocide case at World Court". The Times of Israel. Archived from the original on 21 January 2024. Retrieved 22 January 2024.
  13. ↑ "Public sitting 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)" (PDF). International Court of Justice. The Hague. 12 January 2024. p. 72. Retrieved 19 January 2024. The conflict with Hamas poses serious operational and legal challenges: in conducting close-quarter urban combat, while mitigating harm to the surroundings; in seeking to put a stop to Hamas' military use of hospitals, while minimizing disruption of medical services; in helping civilians leave areas of the most intense fighting, while Hamas forces them to stay in the line of fire; in facilitating the provision of aid, when that aid is constantly stolen by Hamas, to sustain its military efforts; in balancing humanitarian considerations with the need to act forcefully against an adversary that still fires rockets deep into our country and holds our citizens hostage.
  14. 1 2 "Gaza war: ICJ says Israel must prevent genocidal acts in Gaza". BBC News. Archived from the original on 26 January 2024. Retrieved 26 January 2024.
  15. ↑ "Israel-Hamas War: Update from Patrick Kingsley". The New York Times. 26 January 2024. Archived from the original on 26 January 2024. Retrieved 26 January 2024.
  16. ↑ "Order respecting South Africa's request for provisional measures" (PDF). International Court of Justice. 26 January 2024.
  17. ↑ Rajvanshi, Astha (26 January 2024). "U.N. Court Says Israel Must Prevent Genocidal Acts in Gaza, But Doesn't Order a Ceasefire". TIME. Archived from the original on 26 January 2024. Retrieved 26 January 2024.
  18. ↑ "Israel-Hamas war: ICJ stops short of ordering cease-fire, tells Israel to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza". NBC News. 27 January 2024. Archived from the original on 27 January 2024. Retrieved 27 January 2024.
  19. ↑ "World Court stops short of Gaza ceasefire order for Israel". Reuters. 27 January 2024. Retrieved 27 January 2024.
  20. ↑ AlLawati, Nadeen Ebrahim, Abbas (26 January 2024). "Why both South Africa and Israel are welcoming the UN court's ruling in a landmark genocide case". CNN. Archived from the original on 27 January 2024. Retrieved 27 January 2024.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  21. ↑ "Israel reined in by ICJ rulings on Gaza - but will it obey?". 26 January 2024. Archived from the original on 26 January 2024. Retrieved 26 January 2024– via www.bbc.com.
  22. ↑ "The Republic of Nicaragua institutes proceedings against the Federal Republic of Germany and requests the Court to indicate provisional measures" (PDF). International Court of Justice. 1 March 2024.
  23. ↑ "Proceedings instituted by Nicaragua against Germany on 1 March 2024 - Request for the indication of provisional measures - Public hearings to be held on Monday 8 and Tuesday 9 April 2024" (PDF). International Court of Justice. 15 March 2024.
  24. ↑ ICJ to hear Nicaragua case against Germany for ‘facilitating Gaza genocide’
  25. ↑ Press Release of April 26, 2024
  26. ↑ "Live: ICJ rules against imposing measures on Germany over Israel aid". aljazeera.com. Aljazeera. Retrieved 30 April 2024.
  27. ↑ "The top UN court rejects Nicaragua's request for Germany to halt aid to Israel". AP News. 30 April 2024. Retrieved 30 April 2024.
  28. 1 2 3 Saunders, Imogen (6 March 2023). "Interventions and Inadmissibility: Nicaragua v Germany, the Monetary Gold principle, and the Genocide Convention at the International Court of Justice". ANU College of Law.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.