Document page
mun sectionPDF 37
47 pagesrevision 9222
PDF 37
Page image rendered from the stored file at 110 dpi; it sharpens as you zoom. Outlines are placed from each region’s stored position on the page (612 × 792 pt).
readable
Source of this text: embedded text layer. The better of the embedded text and OCR is kept.
However, the ICJ did not order a ceasefire, which was heavily criticized internationally. As seen
in Resolution ES-10/21 of the UNGA the international community overwhelmingly wanted a
ceasefire.Therefore, this decision of the ICJ was scrutinized as a ceasefire would not be
implemented in the Israel-Hamas war.
Pictured: Israel at the International Court of Justice at The Hague, Netherlands.
The European Union called for the ruling to be implemented immediately. The European
Commission issued a statement stating “Orders of the International Court of Justice are binding
on the parties and they must comply with them”. Amnesty International claimed that this ruling
was an important step towards peace.
However the ICJ decision alone cannot put an end to the atrocities and devastation Gazans are
witnessing. Alarming signs of genocide in Gaza, and Israel’s flagrant disregard for international
law highlight the urgent need for effective, unified pressure on Israel to stop its onslaught against
Palestinians. An immediate ceasefire by all parties remains essential and – although not ordered
by the Court – is the most effective condition to implement the provisional measures and end
unprecedented civilian suffering.