Israel at War | International Law

Amnesty International's report on the war in Gaza has not succeeded in establishing genocide under international law. However, the report includes valuable information on patterns of behavior by Israel that raise serious concerns regarding their legality. 

In the second installment of their two-part analysis of the ICC's decision to issue arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, Prof. Yuval Shany and Prof. Amichai Cohen examine the arguments behind the arrest warrants and steps Israel can take to prevent them from being realized. 

IDI's Prof. Yuval Shany and Prof. Irwin Cotler discuss the ICC arrest warrants issued against Israel's Prime Minister and former Defense Minister. The event was hosted by the International Jewish Lawyers organization in partnership with the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (AAJLJ). 

The ICC's unprecedented arrest warrants against leaders of a democratic state carry severe and far-reaching consequences, yet Israel still has far-reaching options to mitigate the damage. 

Israel will likely not succeed in forcing the Court to annul its orders, and attempting to do so will make it even harder for its allies to support it. Instead, it can conduct an independent and effective investigation, avoiding problematic statements, and adhere to the laws of armed conflict.

On November 21, 2024, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued four decisions. These deal with various legal matters arising out of the Prosecutor’s May 20 request to issue arrest warrants as part of his ongoing investigation of the Situation in Palestine, in the context of the War in Gaza.

IDI experts Prof. Amichai Cohen and Prof. Yuval Shany analyze the legality of the September explosions targeting Hezbollah pagers and walkie-talkies through three legal frameworks: the right to use force, principles of distinction and proportionality, and the legality of employing these devices under laws regulating choice of weapons. 

A recent judgment of the Israeli Supreme Court held that conditions in a notorious detention center must comply with Israeli law.

Investigating allegations of abuse at the Sde Teiman detention facility is Israel's moral and legal duty as a rule-based democracy and protects the country on the international legal and diplomatic front. 

The ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israel's policies in the territories of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) are illegal but was more divided on other salient factual and legal findings.

If properly structured, both a commission of inquiry and a preliminary examination by the Israeli police could arguably meet existing complementarity standards.

The issuance of additional interim orders in the genocide proceedings underway at the ICJ limits Israel’s operational wiggle room in Rafah, but leaves it with some flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of the new orders.

The International Court of Justice in The Hague (ICJ) issued new temporary orders against Israel this week. Justice Barak’s dissenting opinion would seem to offer an important lesson for the future. Professional, focused, and well-founded legal criticism—as opposed to the very different means that are currently being widely discussed and pursued—is likely the best way to deal with the ICJ.

In this article, we wish to identify and discuss here some potential problems we identify in the part of the request pertaining to Netanyahu and Gallant, at least as it was presented in the Prosecutor’s short announcement and by the expert report supporting it. 

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen, an expert in international law, explains the repercussions that ICC warrants may have on Israel. Should these warrants be issued, 120 countries would be obligated to execute them. They could severely damage Israel's international image, impacting Israeli officials as well as economic and cultural cooperation

From damage to scientific collaboration to cancellation of arms deals, arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials from the International Criminal Court in the Hague would pose a serious challenge to Israel

The US, the UK, France and other states have announced the imposition of economic sanctions on Israeli residents who are believed to be complicit in 'settler violence.' This document aims to outline the framework of international economic sanctions and contextualize the sanctions imposed on Israelis. 

In its order on provisional measures, the Court appeared to engage in transactional justice. It used harsh rhetoric to describe the catastrophic situation in the Gaza Strip while minimizing the impact of the order by adopting ambiguous language on the contents and scope of the plausibility test.

While the ICJ decision briefly mentions the immediate context of the lawsuit, namely the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, Judge Barak directs them to the full picture that they did not address. He writes about the events of October 7 as Israelis know them to be true.

While neither Israel nor South Africa achieved a complete win, one thing is clear: the story of Israel before the ICJ is only beginning

Prof. Amichai Cohen, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute and an expert in international law, made the following comments on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decision today regarding provisional measures in the case of South Africa v. Israel on the Application of the Genocide Convention.

On Friday, January 26, the International Court of Justice issued its Opinion granting provisional measures in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel. Joining the Just Security Podcast to discuss the Court’s Opinion and its implications are law professors Adil Haque, Oona Hathaway, and IDI's Yuval Shany.

Beyond the fact that the Torah does not make the call to commit genocide, the Tanach and its interpretations in fact obligate the Jewish people to abide by the laws of war. To a large extent, humanity's earliest laws of war can be found in the Bible. 

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) at the Hague held public hearings in the case against Israel for alleged violations of the Genocide Convention. In this essay we address three aspects of the case: the ways the parties framed the events, the request to suspend Israeli military operations, and the conditions for issuing provisional measures. 

One of the claims brought forth in the Application against Israel that it is committing genocide against the Palestinians is that many senior members of the government made references to the biblical precept to wipe out the memory of the ancient Amaleks. This is my professional opinion on the meaning of these locutions and the use made of them in the Application. 

On January 11th, the court will begin by hearing South Africa’s oral argument, with Israel presenting its counter argument on January 12th.

What does the international law state and what are the possible implications of these proceedings on the ongoing war and Israel’s international standing? We’ve compiled a shortlist of important information you should have.

The ICJ is hearing allegations that Israel has violated the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. What is the ICJ? How is the government responding? What are the implications for the war against Hamas and Israel’s international standing?
All the answers in a special IDI explainer.

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen answers a series of questions on international law and its dealings with the laws of war.

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen answers a series of questions on international law and its dealings with the laws of war.

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen answers a series of questions on international law and its dealings with the laws of war.

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen answers a series of questions on international law and its dealings with the laws of war.

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen answers a series of questions on international law and its dealings with the laws of war.

IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen answers a series of questions on international law and its dealings with the laws of war.

The recent application by South Africa to the International Court of Justice brought against Israel under the Genocide Convention illuminates how international law and international institutions can be employed to address the Israel-Hamas war.

International law is a normative system that regulates the conduct between states, organizations recognized by international law and at times, individuals. This explainer presents an overview of international law in conflict and its application in Israel's war against Hamas.   

Is the IDF acting legally and ethically in Gaza? The Times of Israel recently held an hour-long webinar on this topic with IDI's Prof. Amichai Cohen.

This article discusses the responsibilities of the international community with respect to the ongoing war in Gaza, and particularly focusing on responsibilities with regard to the hostage situation. 

Tendentious interpretations of international law are not surprising considering the high emotions surrounding the long and bloody Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, to serve its purpose guiding the conduct of States and retain a high degree of legitimacy, international law must serve as a common legal language. 

Appeals to the HCJ to intervene in decisions relating to the release of prisoners are fairly common, but the Court has repeatedly rejected these appeals, noting that on issues of national defense and diplomacy, the bounds for judicial oversight are particularly narrow. 

The Israeli war cabinet and the complex institutional structure related to war informs greatly on Israel’s decision-making.

Now, when it is clear that Hamas’s murderous attack was unprecedented in its extreme violence, including sexual violence, the relevant international bodies—such as the UN Security Council, UN Women, and the International Red Cross—must respond to these incidents.

The state has a moral and ethical duty of the highest order to act as quickly as possible to free and return all the hostages and the missing. But what is the legal mechanism that should be applied when agreeing deals to secure their release which also involve freeing Palestinian prisoners from Israeli prisons?

The current round of violence between Hamas and Israel has already given rise to many expressions of legal opinion. In this essay, we map some key assumptions and unpack how they can significantly affect ongoing legal debates and deliberations. 

International law does not forbid the evacuation of residents to the southern Gaza Strip; on the contrary, it would appear to demand of Israel that it warns residents and encourages them to leave.

Details and clarifications on the international crimes committed by the Hamas in their abduction of Israeli civilians, and the responsibilities attached to these crimes.

Hamas’s horrendous October 7 attack on Israeli civilians and Israel’s anticipated response pose a unique challenge to scholars and practitioners of the Law of Armed Conflict or International Humanitarian Law (IHL), possibly a challenge they have never faced before.

Justice Hayut's retirement from the presidency of the Supreme Court was well-known in advance, however, the Minister of Justice's refusal to convene the Judicial Selection Committee leaves Israel with a temporary replacement during a national emergency.

The article explores the applicability of international human rights law (IHRL) to the atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7, 2023. Such an analysis is important to fill in gaps in IHL and to establish the jurisdiction of IHRL mechanisms over the violations committed. 

What is a special state of emergency and who declares it?

Minister of Justice Levin declared a "special state of emergency" on October 7th, which has since been extended and is currently valid until October 20th. How does this affect the justice system in Israel?

The main demand made by Benny Gantz, chair of the National Unity party, for entering an emergency government is the establishment of a war cabinet. Why is this important and what would the powers of a war cabinet be? 

Is the operation in Gaza a war, who is authorized declare war and what is the role of the cabinet and the government after war is declared?

The government has once again declared a "special home front situation" as the war in the north intensifies. What does this mean?

As the brutal attack from Gaza continues, the possibility of a change in the composition in the government is being bandied about. What kind of government is possible and what has been done in the past?