The Internation Court of Justice has issued an advisory ruling that Israel’s settlement regime in the West Bank is illegal under international law.

The ICJ, the highest court of the United Nations, was asked to examine the legal status of Israel’s occupation by the UN General Assembly in December of 2022.

Among the countries that presented arguments were Belize, Bolivia, Cuba, the Comoros, Namibia, Syria and the Maldives, many of which have deep-seated problems with corruption and authoritarianism.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the December 2022 resolution “disgraceful”. 

He said: "The Jewish people are not occupying their land and are not occupying their eternal capital Jerusalem. No UN resolution can distort this historical truth.”

The Israeli government previously said it considered the court case to be, "part of the Palestinian attempt to dictate the results of the political settlement [of the Israel-Palestinian conflict] without negotiations.”

The United States government had called on the ICJ to “carefully calibrate its advice" and to avoid issuing an opinion "that calls for a unilateral, immediate and unconditional withdrawal by Israel that does not account for Israel’s legitimate security needs.”

In an opinion issued by Lebanese judge Nawaf Salam, it declared on Friday that Israel has systematically discriminated against Palestinians and conducted a “de facto annexation” of the occupied territories.

The Jewish state’s actions, it said, prevented the Palestinian people from exercising their right to self-determination.

“The transfer by Israel of settlers to the West Bank and Jerusalem as well as Israel’s maintenance of their presence, is contrary to article 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention,” Salam said.

While the verdict is advisory, rather than binding, it will have a significant political and diplomatic impact for Israel.

According to the court, Israel has an obligation to immediately cease all new settlement activity and repeal all legislation maintaining the “unlawful situation” in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Israel must also provide reparations, it added, and return any land taken and assets seized since 1967.

Israelis must be removed from settlements and the elements of the security barrier built within the occupied Palestinian territories must be removed, while Palestinians moved because of the occupation must be allowed to return, it said.

Responding to the verdict, the International Legal Forum (ILF) said the outcome would only serve as a “reward for Hamas” following the October 7 attack.

“Today’s obscene opinion by the International Court of Justice... is yet another utterly baseless and politically motivated decision of the court, masquerading as a legal opinion, that will only further erode the ICJ’s credibility and place it squarely as a tool of Palestinian lawfare,” ILF CEO Arsen Ostrovsky said.

“It will also only push peace further away, by removing any incentive for the Palestinian Authority to negotiate, and pour more fuel on worldwide antisemitism.

“Every democracy that cares about the international legal framework, rule of law and advancing peace in the Middle East, should unequivocally reject the opinion of the International Court of Justice.”

Israel gained control of the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan in 1967.

While it withdrew its forces and settlements from Gaza in 2005, the ICJ emphasised that it still considers the enclave under occupation given that Israel has since controlled its airspace, water and borders.

Fifty-two states and three international organizations took part in the oral proceedings before the court. Israel, however, chose not to send a representative, saying the court lacks jurisdiction to consider the matter.

Speaking before the ruling, international lawyer Phillipe Sands, a member of Palestine’s legal team, said: "In terms of the legal outcomes, and solution that must ultimately be found, this [ICJ case] is as significant as it gets."

But Anne Herzberg, Legal Advisor of NGO Monitor noted: "The ICJ advisory opinion issued today must be seen within the context of the on-going war to eliminate Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. In addition to military action in every conflict, there is also a political warfare component, and this opinion is a clear part of this campaign.

"While less than half of UN member states sought this opinion, the Lebanese-led court has issued a wide-ranging, ahistorical opinion that completely erases the security reality, attacks Jewish self-determination rights and cultural heritage, and eviscerates Oslo and the Middle East Peace Process.

Earlier this week, Israel’s far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, who lives in a settlement, called on Netanyahu to annex the West Bank if the ICJ ruled in favour of Palestine.

“I hereby call on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – if the International Court of Justice in The Hague does decide that the settlement enterprise is illegal – respond to them with a historic decision of applying sovereignty to the territories of the homeland,” he said.

Smotrich insisted he would act to “thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state through massive construction, regulating settlements, building roads and other measures in the field”.

Palestine’s foreign minister said: "The prolonged, continuous Israeli occupation of Palestine is intended to accomplish... the complete disappearance of Palestine and the destruction of the Palestinian people.”

Jonathan Turner of UK Lawyers for Israel previously told the Jewish News Syndicate that a ruling in favour of Palestine would be damaging for Israel’s international reputation.

“The verdict won’t be legally binding, but a lot of people will regard it as authoritative and treat it as if it were an accurate statement of the law,” he said.

"It will be quite difficult to displace it in anything but the most friendly tribunals.”

The case is separate to the that of whether Israel is conducting genocide in Gaza, which the ICJ is also considering.