The International Court of Justice has started hearing on Israel’s continuing severe restrictions on the work of the UN and other international organisations in Gaza.

The ICJ, which sits in The Hague and is the UN’s top court, is expected to hear from 40 states and four international organisations in proceedings slated to last all week.

Representing Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, UN legal counsel Elinor Hammarskjöld reiterated Mr Guterres’ many calls for a ceasefire, humanitarian aid to reach all needy people, and for all hostages to be freed.

A total of 13 UN entities are present in Gaza, Hammarskjöld noted, adding that 295 UN personnel have died in Gaza since the war began on October 7, 2023, following the Hamas-led terror attacks in southern Israel.

The UN legal counsel insisted on the special protections and immunities of UN agencies and personnel needed to implement its mandated activities worldwide, including in the said territories.

These protections also apply during armed conflict, Ms Hammarskjöld said before highlighting Israel’s obligations as the occupying power under international law.

“The overarching obligation is to administer the territory for the benefit of the local population and “to agree to and facilitate relief schemes.

“In the specific context of the current situation, these obligations entail allowing and facilitating all relevant UN entities to carry out those activities for the benefit of the local population,” she said.

The purpose of the hearings at the ICJ all this week is to establish what’s known as an “advisory opinion” on Israel’s obligations as the occupying power in Gaza and the wider territory, in accordance with the UN Charter.

It follows a meeting of the UN General Assembly in December, where Member States voted  137 to 12 to seek the view of the ICJ’s 15 judges amid ongoing Israeli bombardment and dramatic aid shortages across Gaza.

The ICJ judges’ advisory opinion is not binding as opposed to the legal disputes between countries on which it rules (so-called “contentious cases”).

It, however, provides clarity on legal questions.

Once the court has issued its opinion, the General Assembly will be open to picking up the matter again and deciding on further action.

(NAN)