Hearings began at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague on Monday for a groundbreaking case involving the legal implications of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories. The case was initiated following a request from the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on December 30, 2022, which received majority support from its members.

Over the next several weeks, 52 countries will jointly present evidence and arguments at the ICJ regarding the legal status and consequences of the Israeli occupation. The hearings are expected to last until February 26, with a panel of 15 judges scheduled to issue a non-binding, advisory opinion in approximately six months.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu contested the legitimacy of the proceedings at The Hague, emphasizing Israel's intention to maintain full security control over areas west of the Jordan River, including the West Bank, Judea and Samaria, and the Gaza Strip.

Palestine presented its case on Monday, calling on the ICJ to affirm the illegal nature of Israel's presence in the occupied territories. Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian representative to the United Nations, emotionally urged the court to bring an immediate end to the occupation and pave the way for a just and lasting peace, enabling the coexistence of two states.

Experts in international law, such as Paul Reichler, representing Palestine, argued that Israel's policies align with the goals of the Israeli settler movement, aiming to expand control over the occupied territories and integrate them further into Israeli territory. Reichler described the occupation as "gravely unlawful."

On Tuesday, countries including South Africa, Saudi Arabia, and Belgium voiced their condemnations of Israeli occupation, denouncing it as violent and illegal. This was followed by additional statements from the United States, Russia, Egypt, and Hungary on Wednesday.

The court proceedings at the ICJ have also shed light on the obligations outlined in international law for an occupying power. These include introducing minimal changes, respecting the status quo, protecting property, allowing humanitarian aid, and refraining from transferring its own population into the occupied territory. Israel has faced criticism for failing to adhere to these principles, with the establishment of illegal settlements and restrictions on the movement of Palestinians.

The case relates to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem since the Six-Day War in 1967. While Israel officially stopped building new settlements in the West Bank after signing the Oslo Accords in 1993, settlements have continued to expand over the years. Gaza, which was also occupied by Israel in 1967, officially saw an Israeli withdrawal in 2005, but continues to face an Israeli blockade that hinders essential humanitarian aid.

The ICJ hearings have brought attention to the concept of "apartheid" in relation to the Israeli occupation. Organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have described Israel's treatment of Palestinians as apartheid, emphasizing systematic discrimination and deprivation of rights.

As the ICJ hearings progress, the voting patterns of various countries in the UN General Assembly vote of 2022 may indicate their stance in The Hague. Notably, the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada opposed referring the case to the ICJ, while Brazil, Spain, and Switzerland abstained.

The international community awaits the outcome of the ICJ's deliberations and its potential impact on the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ultimately, the hope is that a resolution can be reached, leading to a just and lasting peace where both Palestinians and Israelis can coexist side by side.