Complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee: Tunisia Must Answer for Attacks on Judicial Independence
Geneva, 12 February 2024. Today, with the support of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Human Rights in Practice, Judge Youssef Bouzakher, President of the dissolved High Judicial Council (HJC) and one of the 57 judges and prosecutors...
Gaza: Israel must implement Provisional Measures ordered by the International Court Of Justice
The ICJ welcomes today’s near-unanimous Order of the International Court of Justice (the Court) in the case of South Africa v. Israel, indicating provisional measures under the 1948 Genocide Convention (the Convention).
“Through this Order, the world’s highest judicial authority has acknowledged that there is a risk of genocide being committed in Gaza,” said Said Benarbia, MENA Programme Director of the International Commission of Jurists. “It is now incumbent on Israel to implement the provisional measures – as well as its obligations under the United Nations Charter – as a matter of urgency.”
In its Order delivered orally in The Hague following oral submissions by South Africa and Israel on 11 and 12 January 2024 respectively, the Court found it had prima facie jurisdiction over the case and indicated six (6) provisional measures.
The Court ordered that Israel: (1) take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II(a)-(d) of the Convention; (2) ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in the first order; (3) take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention; and (4) report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to the Order within one month of the Order.
The Court also ordered that Israel take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide against people in Gaza, and enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance. The Court also reminded all parties of their obligations under international humanitarian law, and called for the release of hostages.
The ICJ notes that at the provisional measures stage, the Court does not determine the merits of the case. It therefore has yet to make a determination whether Israel has committed, sanctioned, or incited genocide in violation of the Genocide Convention. A hearing on the merits will be held at a later stage. Furthermore, the role of the Court is to establish the legal responsibility of States, not individuals, in accordance with international law. The determination of the responsibility of any individuals that might be responsible for genocide would fall to the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is presently investigating allegations of international crimes committed by both parties.
This unequivocal call by the Court – a principal organ of the United Nations – for Israel to take all effective measures to prevent the commission of genocide highlights the crucial importance of swift and decisive action by the international community to: i) as previously urged by the International Commission of Jurists, ensure an immediate ceasefire and ensure the release of hostages, and ii) cease aid or assistance to Israel that may facilitate the commission of acts that may amount to genocide or undermine all States’ obligations under the Convention to prevent genocide.
“As the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza since 7 October surpasses 25,000 and continues to mount, the need for international cooperation to enforce these legally binding provisional measures cannot be overstated”, added Banarbia. “Respect for international law, including the Genocide Convention and its preventive function, demands no less”.
Notwithstanding the Order, the ICJ reiterates that individuals from all parties to the conflict, including Israel and Hamas, must be held criminally accountable for any violations of international criminal law committed since 7 October and all States should refrain from providing assistance to any party to the conflict that may amount to complicity in such criminal acts, including by imposing an arms embargo. The ICJ also urges States to support the work of the ICC and the Independent Commission of Inquiry, and, where possible, exercise universal jurisdiction over crimes under international law.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, email: said.benarbia@icj.org
Katherine Iliopoulos, Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, email: katherine.iliopoulos@icj.org
UN Cybercrime Convention: ICJ joins partners’call for substantial changes to protect human rights
The ICJ has joined more than a hundred organizations and experts in a call on the state delegations that will participate in the concluding session of the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee elaborating a proposed Cybercrime Convention (the Convention) to ensure the Convention is narrowly focused on tackling cybercrime, and not used as a tool to undermine human rights.
It is the ICJ’s view that the fight against cybercrime should not come at the expense of human rights, gender equality, and the dignity of the people whose lives will be affected by this Convention. It should not result in impeding security research and making us all less secure.
Robust and meaningful safeguards and limitations are essential to avoid the possibility of abuse of relevant provisions of the Convention that could arise under the guise of combating cybercrime. Absent meaningful changes to address these shortcomings, the Convention should be rejected.
Read the full Statement:
Thailand: Human rights defenders and experts from across the country strategize to better protect land rights
On 15-16 January 2024, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in cooperation with ARTICLE 19, organized a workshop in the province of Chiang Mai where over two dozen civil society actors and human rights defenders considered how to invoke and apply international law and standards related to land. The goal was to advocate for better protection of the human rights of affected individuals and communities across Thailand.
“Access to, use of, and control over land can have direct and indirect implications for the enjoyment of a range of human rights, particularly those under the International Covenant on the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) to which Thailand is a party,” said Seree Nonthasoot, Member of the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (CESCR).
Thailand has a long-standing track record of failing to meet its human rights obligations related to land, especially concerning Indigenous Peoples, peasants, and other traditional communities, many of which have a material and spiritual relationship with their ancestral lands. Violations include the failure to ensure the security of tenure and meaningful and effective participation of communities in land-related decision-making processes.
Large-scale forced evictions conducted in violation of international law, inadequate and inconsistent compensation provided to affected communities and individuals due to land-related policies, and displacement of entire communities that are consequently struggling to access livelihoods without adequate support from the State have also been reported.
“When the social, cultural, spiritual, economic, environmental, and political value of land for communities is systematically disregarded by domestic law, international law and standards become important tools for victims and civil society to use in their advocacy for the protection of human rights. International mechanisms also offer crucial avenues for exposing serious human rights violations and seeking accountability,” added Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ’s Legal Adviser.
The workshop aimed to build participants’ documentation skills, strengthen their advocacy and promote networking. Further, the training explored different approaches and the benefits of engaging with UN human rights mechanisms for the protection of human rights in relation to land. The workshop provided a space for participants to discuss how civil society actors can utilize the outputs of these mechanisms in their activities, as well as how to effectively communicate with such mechanisms to ensure that their engagement is strategic and productive.
Background
Speakers included:
- Pairoj Ponpesh, Adviser, National Human Rights Commission of Thailand
- Pratubjit Neelapaijit, National Human Rights Officer, OHCHR’s Regional Office for Southeast Asia
- Sanhawan Srisod, Legal Adviser, ICJ
- Seree Nonthasoot, Member of the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
Unofficial translations of key CESCR’s jurisprudences into Thai were also provided and shared with the participants. These included:
- General Comment No. 4 on the Right to Adequate Housing
- General Comment No. 7 on the Right to Adequate Housing: Forced Evictions
- General Comment No. 24 on State Obligations under the ICESCR in the Context of Business Activities
- General Comment No. 26 on Land and Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
For more information regarding the legal framework, policies, and practices related to land in the context of the establishment and development of special economic zones (SEZs) against international law and standards, available in English and Thai.
Contact:
Sanhawan Srisod, Associate International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Programme; e: sanhawan.srisod@icj.org
Recent News
The Use of Anti-Terrorism Courts to Suppress Dissent in Venezuela27 Feb 2026
South Sudan: Extend UN Investigations Amid Deteriorating Human Rights Crisis19 Feb 2026
Nepal: Publish Reports on Violent Crackdowns on Protests13 Feb 2026
EU: ICJ publishes strategic litigation guide on children and immigration detention05 Feb 2026