Global · Law & Justice
Palestine: Law Awaiting Enforcement — What Is Needed to Stop the Genocide
The law to stop Gaza's genocide already exists — the Security Council veto and missing enforcers keep it unmet
Summary
International law already obliges states to prevent genocide and end Israel's occupation; enforcement is blocked by the Security Council veto, the ICC's lack of police, and divided state and EU action.
What it argues
- Duty to Prevent Established
The ICJ ruled Serbia breached its duty to prevent the Srebrenica genocide though it did not commit it directly. The Court rejected Yugoslavia's argument that states need only legislate against and punish genocide, not prevent it. Judge Al-Khasawneh dissented, saying evidence supported Serbia's direct involvement, not just a failure to prevent. The duty to prevent genocide is an independent, binding obligation, separate from the duty not to commit it.
- ICJ and ICC Rulings on Gaza
In January 2024 the ICJ found it "plausible" Israel is committing genocide and ordered preventive steps and aid access. Its July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful. The ICC's chief prosecutor announced in June 2024 that he sought arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant. The world's top courts have already ruled against Israel's conduct and occupation.
- Binding Rulings, No Enforcer
ICJ orders bind under UN Charter Article 94, but enforcement goes through the Security Council, where the US vetoes action. The ICC has no police of its own to execute its arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant. Courts split: the UK ruled F-35 exports lawful; a Dutch ban was partly reversed, and exports reportedly continued regardless in 2026. Binding rulings exist, but each enforcement channel is blocked, absent or evaded.
- Hague Group Coalition
Nine Global South states founded the Hague Group in January 2025 to enforce ICJ and ICC rulings on Palestine. At a Bogotá summit in July 2025, 12 states agreed to block arms, fuel and port access to Israel; Turkey later joined. UN experts urged wider membership in 2025, and Brazil proposed an apartheid-style monitoring body, even as founders began withdrawing. A state coalition is trying to enforce existing rulings outside the Security Council, gaining backers even as it loses founding members.
- Uniting for Peace Bypass
The 1950 resolution lets the General Assembly recommend collective action, including force, when a Security Council veto blocks it. Invoked 13 times since 1950, but its recommendations are non-binding and it has authorized real enforcement only once, in the 1951 Korean war. The tenth emergency special session, opened in 1997 over the Palestinian occupation, remains unconcluded. A legal bypass for Security Council deadlock exists but carries no binding force and is almost never used for enforcement.
- Arms Policies Diverge
Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, Japan and Italy suspended arms sales after the ICJ's 2024 ruling; Macron urged a halt in 2024. The US, Israel's top supplier, kept sending weapons and approved a $14bn aid package in 2024. Germany halted exports in August 2025 over Israel's Gaza City plan, then lifted the halt after the Gaza peace plan. State decisions on arms sales remain split and reversible rather than settled by the rulings.
- EU Trade Ties and Blocked Suspension
The EU is Israel's largest trading partner under the 2000 Association Agreement, whose Article 2 makes human rights "an essential element." Spain and Ireland asked the European Commission in October 2024 to suspend it; Borrell said in June 2025 the EU had a "legal obligation" to. In April 2026, Spain, Ireland and Slovenia renewed the push; Germany and Italy vetoed it. EU states acknowledge a legal duty to suspend economic ties with Israel but have not carried it out.
- Settlement Goods Already Blocked
The EU's 2010 Brita ruling found goods from West Bank settlements do not qualify for the Association Agreement's preferential tariffs. Israel suspended diplomatic dialogue with the EU in 2015 after it moved to label settlement-origin products. The EU has enforced one narrow trade distinction even as the broader suspension push stays blocked.
Key points
- States already carry a legal duty to prevent genocide, independent of committing it, per the ICJ's Bosnia ruling.
- The ICJ's 2024 rulings found Israel's conduct in Gaza plausibly genocidal and its occupation unlawful.
- ICJ orders bind under UN Charter Article 94, but enforcement runs through a Security Council the US vetoes, and the ICC has no police.
- Arms-sales responses are split: several states suspended exports while the US and others kept supplying weapons.
- Legal routes to escalate action, including Uniting for Peace and suspending the EU-Israel agreement, exist but remain largely unused.
Sources
- Article: Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovin — icj-cij.org
- Article: Bosnian genocide case - Wikipedia — en.wikipedia.org
- Web page: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-1/commentary/2016 — ihl-databases.icrc.org
- Article: Search Documents | The Arms Trade Treaty — The Arms Trade Treaty
- Article: Client Challenge — press.un.org
- Article: Uniting for Peace General Assembly resolution 377 (V) — legal.un.org
- Article: United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377 (V) - Wikipedia — en.wikipedia.org
- Article: Hague Group - Wikipedia — en.wikipedia.org
- Article: Israel–European Union relations - Wikipedia — en.wikipedia.org
- Article: Arms embargoes on Israel since 2023 - Wikipedia — en.wikipedia.org
