(October 15, 2024)
Over the past year, Israel has launched attacks on multiple countries and occupied territories: the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iran.
Yet countries and territories aside, Israel has also targeted one specific organization with a series of unprecedented rhetorical and violent attacks.
Yes, the United Nations. We have all witnessed Israel, in effect, declare war on the UN.
(August 28, 2024)
The Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC) is leading the drive for Israel’s suspension, Maren Mantovani, the international outreach coordinator of the Stop the Wall campaign, told PassBlue. The organization is based in Ramallah, in the occupied West Bank.
“There is an ongoing, concerted effort by Palestinian civil society to push the UN to uphold its mission . . . and to define and enact the precise modalities to end Israel’s crimes and violations,” Mantovani said.
Saleh Hijazi, a BNC adviser on apartheid-free policy, said he expected calls for Israel’s suspension to intensify next month with the opening of the 79th session of the General Assembly. UNGA, as it is known, begins on Sept. 10.
(The Palestinian delegation at the UN said on Aug. 22 that it was also planning to soon initiate an “actionable resolution” in the General Assembly, “demanding within a time frame the end of this illegal occupation and all other issues contained” in the ICJ advisory opinion.)
“I have been in a number of international forums over the past few months, including a joint meeting between the Organization of Islamic Co-operation and the UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, where sanctions, including diplomatic [measures] and suspending Israel from UNGA, were a big part of the discussion,” Hijazi said by email.
(October 22, 2025)
164. The Court recalls that, on 29 November 1948, referring to General Assembly resolution 181 (II) on the future government of Palestine, Israel applied for admission to membership of the United Nations, formally declaring that it “hereby unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a Member of the United Nations” (letter dated 29 November 1948 from Israel’s Foreign Minister to the United Nations Secretary-General concerning Israel’s Application for Admission to Membership of the United Nations and Declaration Accepting Obligations under the Charter, UN doc. S/1093). On 11 May 1949, the General Assembly took note of this declaration when it admitted Israel as a Member of the United Nations (General Assembly resolution 273 (III)).
165. For the purpose of responding to the question posed by the General Assembly, the Court will not examine all the obligations that Israel has undertaken as a Member of the United Nations under the Charter with regard to the question of Palestine. It will limit its analysis to those obligations concerning the presence and activities of the United Nations, including its entities, in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
(…)
223. For these reasons,
THE COURT ,
(1) Unanimously,
Finds that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested;
(2) Unanimously,
Decides to comply with the request for an advisory opinion;
(3) Is of the opinion that the State of Israel, as an occupying Power, is required to fulfil its obligations under international humanitarian law. These obligations include the following:
(a) Unanimously,
to ensure 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;
(b) By ten votes to one,
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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(c) Unanimously,
to respect and protect all relief and medical personnel and facilities;
(d) Unanimously,
to respect the prohibition on forcible transfer and deportation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
(e) Unanimously,
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; and
(f) Unanimously,
to respect the prohibition on the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare;
(4) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(5) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(6) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(7) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(8) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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.
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde.
SECTION 3. The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whom soever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action.
(…)
SECTION 30. All differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the present convention shall be referred to the International Court of Justice, unless in any case it is agreed by the parties to have recourse to another mode of settlement. If a difference arises between the United Nations on the one hand and a Member on the other hand, a request shall be made for an advisory opinion on any legal question involved in accordance with Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of the Statute of the Court. The opinion given by the Court shall be accepted as decisive by the parties.
The raid on Monday, which Israeli authorities said was intended to collect municipal tax debts, escalates tensions between Israel and the United Nations in what is an already extremely fraught relationship.
Philippe Lazzarini, who heads UNRWA, said the compound was not in active use, but he said that it remains a United Nations location, exempt from search, seizure or taxation under international law. “To allow this represents a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the U.N. is present across the world,” he wrote on social media.
As recently confirmed by the International Court of Justice, any executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action against United Nations property and assets is prohibited under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.
I urge Israel to……………..
(April 27, 2025)
On October 28, 2024, the Knesset banned the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in Israel and its occupation zone Palestine by law.
Now, the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 13 February 1946, states in Section 30 the following:
„All differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the present convention shall be referred to the International Court of Justice, unless in any case it is agreed by the parties to have recourse to another mode of settlement. If a difference arises between the United Nations on the one hand and a Member on the other hand, a request shall be made for an advisory opinion on any legal question involved in accordance with Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of the Statute of the Court. The opinion given by the Court shall be accepted as decisive by the parties.“
The United Nations Charter, Article 96:
(1) The General Assembly, the Governing Council or the Security Council may request the International Renewal Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on any legal question.
(2) Other organs of the Renewed United Nations and specialised agencies, which may at any time be so authorised by the Governing Council or by the General Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities.
In short: every government of a UN member state could bring in a resolution to the Assembly that, once it is adopted, requests an urgent advisory opinion of the World Court, the International Court of Justice.
And if the World Court decides so, Israel is being kicked out of the United Nations. That‘s it. The Security Council is meaningless on that matter.
So here is the question of questions, to all of you around the world: Although it has been publicly demanded, even promised by various governments – why hasn´t this happened yet?
Israel is party to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UN. The Convention makes UN premises inviolable – in other words, immune from search and/or seizure – and makes UN property and assets immune from legal process.
The International Court of Justice has also underscored that Israel is obliged to cooperate with UNRWA and other UN agencies.
There can be no exceptions. To allow this represents a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the UN is present across the world.
Israeli authorities entered the U.N. Palestinian refugee agency‘s East Jerusalem offices on Monday and raised Israel‘s flag, in a raid they said was ordered over unpaid taxes but was condemned by the agency as a challenge to international law.
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which has been accused of bias by Israel, has not used the building since the start of this year after Israel ordered it to vacate all its premises and cease its operations.
In December 2024 Amnesty International issued an extensive study concluding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza arguing that Israel had carried out three acts prohibited under the Genocide Convention, with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza, including killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction.
Today despite a reduction in scale of attacks, and some limited improvements, there has been no meaningful change in the conditions Israel is inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza and no evidence to indicate that Israel’s intent has changed.
“Israel has inflicted devastating harm on Palestinians in Gaza through its genocide, including two years of relentless bombardment and deliberate systematic starvation. So far, there is no indication that Israel is taking serious measures to reverse the deadly impact of its crimes and no evidence that its intent has changed. In fact, Israeli authorities are continuing their ruthless policies, restricting access to vital humanitarian aid and essential services, and deliberately imposing conditions calculated to physically destroy Palestinians in Gaza,” said Agnès Callamard.
At least 347people, including 136 children, have been killed in Israeli attacks since the ceasefire was announced on 9 October. Israel continues to restrict access to critical aid and relief supplies, including medical supplies and equipment necessary to repair life-sustaining infrastructure, violating multiple orders from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for Israel to ensure that Palestinians have access to humanitarian supplies, in the case brought by South Africa to prevent Israel’s genocide. In January 2024, the ICJ found that Palestinians’ rights under the Genocide Convention, namely their survival were plausibly at risk.
The objective probability that the current conditions would lead to the destruction of Palestinians in Gaza persists, particularly considering the enhanced vulnerability of the population to sickness and spread of disease following months of famine caused by years of unlawful blockade and months of total siege earlier this year. This has created circumstances that would lead to a slow death of Palestinians resulting from the lack of proper food, water, shelter, clothing or sanitation.
Ceasefire violations by Israel, no housing, destroyed farmland and ongoing sea blockade are intended to destroy Palestinians in Gaza, report says
(October 22, 2025)
223. For these reasons,
THE COURT ,
(1) Unanimously,
Finds that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested;
(2) Unanimously,
Decides to comply with the request for an advisory opinion;
(3) Is of the opinion that the State of Israel, as an occupying Power, is required to fulfil its obligations under international humanitarian law. These obligations include the following:
(a) Unanimously,
to ensure 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;
(b) By ten votes to one,
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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(c) Unanimously,
to respect and protect all relief and medical personnel and facilities;
(d) Unanimously,
to respect the prohibition on forcible transfer and deportation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
(e) Unanimously,
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; and
(f) Unanimously,
to respect the prohibition on the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare;
Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz has officially barred the International Committee of the Red Cross from visiting Palestinians held under Israel’s so-called “unlawful combatants” law, a legal category that does not exist under international law and allows indefinite detention without charge, trial or oversight.
Katz claimed in a decree that allowing ICRC access would “seriously harm national security”, effectively ensuring that Palestinian detainees held under this exceptional measure remain entirely hidden from international monitoring.
„UNRWA‘s not going to play any role in it,“ Rubio said when asked about whether the controversial agency would assist in delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza. „The United Nations is here. They‘re on the ground. We‘re willing to work with them if they can make it work, but not UNRWA. UNRWA became a subsidiary of Hamas.“
„The situation still remains catastrophic because what‘s entering is not enough,“ WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told an online press briefing from the UN health agency‘s Geneva headquarters.
Since the US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas came into effect on October 10, there has been „no dent in hunger, because there is not enough food“, he warned.
The International Court of Justice said Wednesday that Israel was obliged to ease the passage of aid into famine-wracked Gaza, stressing it had to provide Palestinians with the „basic needs“ to survive.
The data analysed by AFP is compiled by the UN‘s „2720 Mechanism for Gaza“, which has monitored and tracked humanitarian aid entering Gaza since May 19, the day after the end of Israel‘s two-month blockade of Gaza which prevented humanitarian aid from entering.
223. For these reasons,
THE COURT ,
(1) Unanimously,
Finds that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested;
(2) Unanimously,
Decides to comply with the request for an advisory opinion;
(3) Is of the opinion that the State of Israel, as an occupying Power, is required to fulfil its obligations under international humanitarian law. These obligations include the following:
(a) Unanimously,
to ensure 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;
(b) By ten votes to one,
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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(c) Unanimously,
to respect and protect all relief and medical personnel and facilities;
(d) Unanimously,
to respect the prohibition on forcible transfer and deportation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory;
(e) Unanimously,
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; and
(f) Unanimously,
to respect the prohibition on the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare;
(4) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(5) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(6) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(7) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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;
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde;
(8) By ten votes to one,
Is of the opinion 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.
IN FAVOUR: President Iwasawa; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Xue, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant,
Gómez Robledo, Cleveland, Tladi;
AGAINST: Vice-President Sebutinde.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) says that Israel must uphold its responsibilities as the “occupying power” by ensuring aid can flow freely and by respecting the rights of the UN and other humanitarian agencies working in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The Scandinavian country initiated the UN resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ on Israel’s obligations, and the court ruled earlier that Israel is obliged under international law to facilitate the delivery of aid to Gaza.
“Norway intends to follow up on this (ICJ) decision with a new resolution at the UN General Assembly,” Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide tells a press conference.
“No country can place itself above its obligations under international law. This is essential, both for Palestinians and for all other populations living in situations of war and conflict,” he adds.
The ICJ’s advisory opinion, issued during a fragile ceasefire, reinforces UN authority and affects global humanitarian missions
The International Court of Justice says Israel must allow the U.N. aid agency in Gaza, known as UNRWA, to provide humanitarian assistance to the war-torn territory
sraeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon says the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion on UNRWA is “shameful.”
“They are blaming Israel for not cooperating with UN organs… They should be blaming themselves. Those organs became breeding grounds for terrorists. Take for example UNRWA… an organization that supported Hamas for years,” Danon says.
ICJ advisory opinions are highly authoritative among states and the court‘s interpretation of a legal question is considered binding as a matter of general international law.
Court President Iwasawa says Israel cannot use starvation as a method of warfare.
“The court recalls Israel’s obligation not to use starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare,” said Iwasawa.
The UN General Assembly asked the court last year to give an advisory opinion on Israel’s legal obligations after the country effectively banned the UN agency for Palestinian refugees.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) says Israel must facilitate UN aid efforts in Gaza, including UNRWA’s, and must ensure “basic needs” of Gaza population.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, delivers its Advisory Opinion on the 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, on 22 October 2025, at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the seat of the Court. Session held under the presidency of Judge Iwasawa Yuji, President of the Court.
Article 96
(1) The General Assembly, the Governing Council or the Security Council may request the International Renewal Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on any legal question.
(2) Other organs of the Renewed United Nations and specialised agencies, which may at any time be so authorised by the Governing Council or by the General Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities.
SECTION 3. The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whom soever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action.
(…)
SECTION 30. All differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the present convention shall be referred to the International Court of Justice, unless in any case it is agreed by the parties to have recourse to another mode of settlement. If a difference arises between the United Nations on the one hand and a Member on the other hand, a request shall be made for an advisory opinion on any legal question involved in accordance with Article 96 of the Charter and Article 65 of the Statute of the Court. The opinion given by the Court shall be accepted as decisive by the parties.
THE HAGUE, 9 October 2025. On Wednesday 22 October 2025, the International Court of Justice will deliver its Advisory Opinion on the 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.
A public sitting will take place at 3 p.m. during which Judge Iwasawa Yuji, President of the Court, will read out the Advisory Opinion.
The opinion, which was requested by the U.N. General Assembly in December, will be closely watched as it could have effects beyond the Gaza conflict. It is expected to address the protections states must provide for U.N. staff worldwide.
(…)
The request for an ICJ opinion was prompted by a 2023 Israeli law that banned U.N. Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA from operating in the country, as it said the organisation had employed members of Hamas who took part in the attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023.