TEHRAN (Iran News) “I think the court will decide that genocide has been committed in Gaza, given what is happening now, especially in the north, in the Jabalia (refugee) camp, where Israel is trying to force the entire population out of that area…and the UN is warning that famine is imminent,” said Quigley, an emeritus professor of international law at Ohio State University.

He spoke to Anadolu in an interview about the ICJ’s potential role in addressing war crimes in Gaza, particularly following the escalation on Oct. 7, 2023.

While Israel might contest the court’s jurisdiction, Quigley anticipates the ICJ will assert its authority, which would necessitate Israel filing a memorial on the merits of the case.

Regarding the ICJ’s January order, Quigley underscored the court’s firm stance.

“The court said…that Israel must refrain from killing,” he said.

Although the court cannot mandate a complete ceasefire, “since it lacks jurisdiction over Hamas,” Quigley noted it “strongly told Israel to stop.”

He pointed out, however, that enforcing the court’s orders presents challenges. If the ICJ issues rulings that it knows will not be enforced, it risks being seen as ineffective.

“It does make the court look like a paper tiger,” he said, suggesting that this might prevent it from taking more decisive actions at times.

Unique factors in Gaza genocide case

Quigley explained that the situation in Gaza is distinct from previous genocide cases involving Bosnia and Croatia. He emphasized that in addition to acts of killing, Gaza faces “imposing conditions calculated to result in the population’s physical destruction,” which aligns with a separate article of the Genocide Convention clearly violated by Israel.

Noting that cases at the ICJ take years to resolve, Quigley said that decisions made on the merits often do little to address the immediate situation.

“The solution for that is the idea of provisional measures,” he said, suggesting that these measures could help manage the ongoing crisis.

He also stressed the significance of other states intervening in the legal process.

“Intervention brings other states into the picture,” Quigley said, adding that some nations prefer to intervene only at the merits stage.

He expressed his hope for more states to intervene in cases against Israel.

Currently, the ICJ is handling two major cases related to the Gaza conflict: one from South Africa accusing Israel of genocide through direct killing and withholding essential resources, and another from Nicaragua challenging Germany over its arms supplies to Israel.

Despite these legal proceedings, the international community has struggled to stop the violations of international law in Gaza.

The United Nations continues to report worsening humanitarian conditions. This has raised doubts about the effectiveness of international courts in addressing ongoing crises.

Since Oct. 7, 2023, Israel’s brutal offensive on Gaza has claimed the lives of more than 43,900 people and rendered the region nearly uninhabitable.

The bombardment has displaced most of the population, while an ongoing blockade has caused severe shortages of food, water and medicine.

TEHRAN (Iran News) –In a statement on Saturday, Nasser Kanaani said the ICJ’s advisory opinion about the “legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem”, released on July 19, reflected the international community’s grave concerns about the Israeli regime’s illegal and criminal measures.

Citing the ICJ ruling that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land violates international law and must end, Kanaani said, “The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that the oppressed Palestinian nation’s fundamental right to self-determination has been constantly violated during the past years, particularly after the declaration of establishment of the child-murdering Israeli regime and continues to be violated, as the violation of the rights of Palestinian people is not confined to a specific era.”

He also noted that the Israeli genocidal crimes, its crimes against humanity, and the war crimes committed against Gaza during the past recent months have systematically violated the Palestinian nation’s right to self-determination.

The Iranian spokesman then called on the international community, specifically the UN Security Council, to hold the Zionist regime’s officials accountable and take practical steps to end the Israeli acts of aggression against Palestine and its illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories.

Kanaani then reiterated Iran’s progressive idea for settling the current illegal conditions in occupied Palestine, calling for an inclusive referendum involving all residents and main citizens of Palestine, including Muslims, Christians and Jews.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on July 19 that Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and should come to an end “as rapidly as possible”.

Nawaf Salam, president of the ICJ in The Hague, read out the nonbinding advisory opinion issued by the 15-judge panel on Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory on Friday.

The judges pointed to a wide list of policies – including the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, use of the area’s natural resources, the annexation and imposition of permanent control over lands and discriminatory policies against Palestinians – all of which it said violated international law.

The court said Israel has no right to sovereignty of the territories, is violating international laws against acquiring territory by force and is impeding Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

The court’s opinion was sought in a 2022 request from the United Nations General Assembly.

The ICJ, also known as the World Court, is the highest UN body for hearing disputes between states.

TEHRAN (Iran News) –In a statement on Saturday, Nasser Kanaani said the ICJ’s advisory opinion about the “legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem”, released on July 19, reflected the international community’s grave concerns about the Israeli regime’s illegal and criminal measures.

Citing the ICJ ruling that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land violates international law and must end, Kanaani said, “The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that the oppressed Palestinian nation’s fundamental right to self-determination has been constantly violated during the past years, particularly after the declaration of establishment of the child-murdering Israeli regime and continues to be violated, as the violation of the rights of Palestinian people is not confined to a specific era.”

He also noted that the Israeli genocidal crimes, its crimes against humanity, and the war crimes committed against Gaza during the past recent months have systematically violated the Palestinian nation’s right to self-determination.

The Iranian spokesman then called on the international community, specifically the UN Security Council, to hold the Zionist regime’s officials accountable and take practical steps to end the Israeli acts of aggression against Palestine and its illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories.

Kanaani then reiterated Iran’s progressive idea for settling the current illegal conditions in occupied Palestine, calling for an inclusive referendum involving all residents and main citizens of Palestine, including Muslims, Christians and Jews.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on July 19 that Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and should come to an end “as rapidly as possible”.

Nawaf Salam, president of the ICJ in The Hague, read out the nonbinding advisory opinion issued by the 15-judge panel on Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory on Friday.

The judges pointed to a wide list of policies – including the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, use of the area’s natural resources, the annexation and imposition of permanent control over lands and discriminatory policies against Palestinians – all of which it said violated international law.

The court said Israel has no right to sovereignty of the territories, is violating international laws against acquiring territory by force and is impeding Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

The court’s opinion was sought in a 2022 request from the United Nations General Assembly.

The ICJ, also known as the World Court, is the highest UN body for hearing disputes between states.

TEHRAN (Iran News) –“A public sitting will take place at 3 p.m. at the Peace Palace in The Hague, during which Judge Nawaf Salam, President of the Court, will read out the Court’s Order,” the top UN court said in a statement on Thursday, Anadolu Agency reported.

Last week, the ICJ held a two-day hearing for additional provisional measures against Israel. It ended with the court’s request from Israel to provide information about the existing humanitarian conditions in the designated evacuation zones in the Gaza Strip.

More than 35,600 Palestinians have been killed, the vast majority of whom have been women and children, and nearly 79,900 others injured since the Israeli regime began its attacks last October.

Israel stands accused of genocide at the ICJ.

In a related development, International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan on Monday said he has reasonable grounds to believe that the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and its defense minister, Yoav Gallant, bear criminal responsibility for “war crimes and crimes against humanity” committed on Palestinian territories, specifically the Gaza Strip.

In remarks on Wednesday, director of the Iranian Presidency’s Centre for International Legal Affairs and the country’s representative in the International Court of Justice, Hamidreza Olumi Yazdi, said the US has questioned the ICJ’s jurisdiction with the purpose of delaying the legal procedure for hearing Iran’s complaint and the strong evidence for the US violation of the 1955 Treaty of Amity.

The US’ reasons to object to the ICJ’s competence to rule in the case either lack legal basis or are based on groundless allegations against Iran, he added.

Denouncing the illegal re-imposition of US sanctions after its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Olumi Yazdi said the cruel sanctions have already targeted all sectors of Iran’s economy, including the oil and gas industries, financial and banking sector, automotive and shipping industries, metal production and construction.

The US sanctions have inflicted widespread financial and non-financial damages on the Iranian people and companies, he deplored.

The Iranian official finally reminded the ICJ president and judges that the international court has now a “historic opportunity” to stand against the US government’s unilateralism and law-breaking, to dismiss Washington’s baseless objection, and begin to hear the case.

The International Court of Justice has begun weeklong sessions on the issue of its jurisdiction to consider the complaint filed by Iran against the re-imposition of US sanctions.

Iran began a legal battle before the International Court of Justice in July 2018, after US President Donald Trump re-imposed harsh unilateral sanctions on Tehran, which were suspended under the international agreement on Iran’s nuclear program.

In May 2018, Trump announced the withdrawal of the United States from the nuclear agreement. Later in October, the US faced its first setback in the highest judicial body of the United Nations after the International Court of Justice ordered the suspension of some of the sanctions that were re-imposed on Iran, including goods used for “humanitarian purposes.”

Washington responded immediately by canceling a friendship agreement signed between the two countries in 1955, which the court had relied on to justify its decision.

Iran had asked the International Court of Justice to suspend the sanctions temporarily until the judges decide on the content of the case, which could take years. The court will consider these sessions within its competence to rule in the case, which Washington strongly opposes, Right Now Times reported.

The International Court of Justice was established after the Second World War and examines disputes between states, but it does not have the binding means to implement its decisions.

Tehran dragged Washington to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague in 2018 after Trump pulled the US out of a landmark international nuclear deal with Iran.

They will argue over the coming week about whether the court, set up after World War II to deal with disputes between UN member states, actually has jurisdiction in the case, AFP reported.

Iran says the sanctions brought back by the Trump administration breach the 1955 “Treaty of Amity” between the two countries, signed long before the 1979 Iranian revolution severed ties.

Tehran won an early victory in October 2018 when the ICJ ordered sanctions on humanitarian goods to be eased as an emergency measure while the overall lawsuit is dealt with.

The US responded by formally ending the treaty.

The United States will first address the court on Monday at 1300 GMT about whether judges have jurisdiction in the case, while Iran will speak on Wednesday.

A decision on that issue could take several months, while a final judgment will take years.

Trump withdrew from the deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in 2018. Washington then reimposed sanctions on Iran.

Tehran took the case to the ICJ and, in response to Iran’s request for “provisional measures” while the case is resolved, the judges two years ago found that some of the sanctions breached the 1955 treaty.

The court ordered Washington to lift measures on medicines, medical equipment, food, agricultural goods, and airplane parts and services.

The ICJ is also dealing with a separate case over Tehran’s bid to unfreeze $2 billion in assets frozen in the United States.

In February 2019 the court said the case could go ahead, rejecting US arguments that Tehran’s alleged backing for terror groups should disqualify its lawsuit.