Ambiguity in ICJ Ruling on Rafah

The ruling issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday 24th May has been presented by many media organisations, e.g. the Associated Press, as demanding Israel immediately cease its offensive against the remaining battalions of Hamas in Rafah.

As a result, Israel’s continuation of the fighting has been presented as defiance of the court order.

However, there is ambiguity in the court ruling which has been picked up by other news outlets who have included more detail in the first few paragraphs of their reports to quote the ruling more fully.

For example, the fourth paragraph in the Sky News report quoted the court’s president as saying:

“The state of Israel shall... 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.”

Thus implying that Israel only need stop if they are in danger of destroying a part of the Palestinian people.

The Times of Israel notes that there is even a difference of opinion among the 15 judges of the ICJ, with several of them expressing the opinion that the ruling simply instructs Israel not to violate the Genocide Convention in its Rafah campaign.

That view is the one taken by Israel’s government, leading them to continue the campaign on the basis that they are not violating the Genocide Convention.

This report by France 24 News covers some of the complexity of the situation: