Provisional measures

1
APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF
THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE IN THE GAZA STRIP (SOUTH AFRICA v. ISRAEL)
URGENT REQUEST FOR THE MODIFICATION AND INDICATION OF PROVISIONAL
MEASURES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 41 OF THE STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
COURT OF JUSTICE AND ARTICLES 75 AND 76 OF THE RULES OF COURT OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The Republic of South Africa (‘South Africa’) regrettably finds it necessary to return to the

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands
Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928
Website X YouTube LinkedIn
Summary
Unofficial
Summary 2024/4
30 April 2024
Alleged Breaches of Certain International Obligations in respect of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Nicaragua v. Germany) Request for the indication of provisional measures

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands
Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928
Website X YouTube LinkedIn
Press Release
Unofficial
No. 2024/37
30 April 2024
Alleged Breaches of Certain International Obligations in respect of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Nicaragua v. Germany) Request for the indication of provisional measures The Court finds that the circumstances do not require the exercise of its power to indicate provisional measures

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC AL-KHASAWNEH
Unusual character of Court’s Order  Divergent from Court’s rich and constant
jurisprudence  Lack of reasoning  Urgency evidently satisfied  Monetary Gold principle
inapplicable  Procedural flaw in hearing the Parties.
1. The Order issued today by the Court on the request for the indication of provisional
measures by Nicaragua is an unusual document, more notable for what it does not contain than for

DECLARATION OF JUDGE TLADI
Assessment of “circumstances” requiring exercise of the Court’s power under Article 41 of the Statute  Court must remain free to weigh all circumstances together in a fluid way  Conditions developed in Court’s jurisprudence for indication of provisional measures are not a “box-ticking” exercise  Present Order is not inconsistent with the approach adopted by the Court in the past.

DECLARATION OF JUDGE CLEVELAND

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE IWASAWA

SEPARATE OPINION OF VICE-PRESIDENT SEBUTINDE
Although I have voted with the majority in rejecting Nicaragua’s Request for provisional
measures, I do not agree with the approach that the Court has adopted in handling the Request, nor
do I agree with the scanty reasoning that underpins the Order  There is a need to strictly adhere
to the criteria that the Court has developed in its jurisprudence for the indication of provisional
measures  It is highly doubtful whether the Court has prima facie jurisdiction as Nicaragua has

30 AVRIL 2024
ORDONNANCE
MANQUEMENTS ALLÉGUÉS À CERTAINES OBLIGATIONS INTERNATIONALES RELATIVEMENT AU TERRITOIRE PALESTINIEN OCCUPÉ (NICARAGUA c. ALLEMAGNE)
___________
ALLEGED BREACHES OF CERTAIN INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS IN RESPECT OF THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY (NICARAGUA v. GERMANY)
30 APRIL 2024
ORDER
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
YEAR 2024
2024
30 April
General List
No. 193
30 April 2024
ALLEGED BREACHES OF CERTAIN INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS IN RESPECT OF THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY