←back to thread

ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

(apnews.com)
517 points xbar | 2 comments | 26 Jan 24 14:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
blitz_skull ◴[26 Jan 24 20:29 UTC] No.39147822[source]▶
What's the ICJ's actual ability to enforce this? "Orders" sounds like they have some sort of weight to throw around if Israel doesn't comply, but I'm not familiar with the ICJ or what possible consequences could arise if Israel simply decided it was going to do what it wanted.
replies(3): >>39147925 #>>39148062 #>>39148600 #
dragonwriter ◴[26 Jan 24 21:22 UTC] No.39148600[source]▶
> What's the ICJ's actual ability to enforce this?

Zero, the same as most courts.

Enforcement is a matter for (ordinarily) the Security Council, or, in the case of deadlock, potentially the GA acting under Uniting for Peace. Well, decisions on enforcement; actual enforcement is left to individual UN members, acting on direction of those UN bodies.

Note that enforcement in practice is often a problem, as with the provisional measures adopted against Russia in the Ukraine v. Russia genocide case.

replies(2): >>39148646 #>>39149342 #
1. blitz_skull ◴[26 Jan 24 21:25 UTC] No.39148646[source]▶
Am I to understand then that a member of the UN could decide that intervene? Or would they need to be “allowed” to intervene on behalf of the ICJ?
replies(1): >>39148716 #
2. dragonwriter ◴[26 Jan 24 21:30 UTC] No.39148716[source]▶
> Am I to understand then that a member of the UN could decide that intervene?

Unilateral intervention against genocide is possible and arguably legal even without an ICJ ruling, but ordinarily the preferred method would be sanction from the UN via a Security Council resolution, or by a General Assembly resolution from an emergency special session called to address a Security Council deadlock.