The UN Security Council has elected Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud, Jordan’s ambassador to the UN, to serve as a judge on the 15-member International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Hmoud ran unopposed for the seat on the court and won the role in a unanimous vote of the council, which is comprised of 15 states including the US, UK and France.
He will serve out the term of Nawaf Salam, who resigned in January to become Lebanon’s prime minister in the government of new president Joseph Aoun.
However, concern has been raised regarding Hmoud’s previous comments regarding the war in Gaza, particularly as the ICJ is currently hearing a case brought by South Africa accusing the Jewish State of genocide, which Jerusalem denies.
The Jordanian diplomat has previously described Israel’s war against Hamas as a “vicious attack against the protected population of Gaza”.
“[We stressed] the urgent need for stopping the Israeli war on the people of Gaza and necessity of ensuring unhindered access of aid into Gaza,” he wrote in January, after meeting with Sigrid Kaag, the UN humanitarian and reconstruction coordinator for Gaza.
Hmoud’s term is set to last until February 2027.
The news comes after the ICJ opened a series of hearings into whether Israel was complying with is duties under international law in terms of supplying aid to Gaza, particularly in the wake of the Knesset passing a ban on collaboration with the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (Unrwa).
Jerusalem has long maintained that Unrwa has been infiltrated by terror groups, including presenting evidence that some of its workers participated in the October 7, 2023 attacks.
The court is set to assess whether the ban violated Israel’s obligation as a signatory to the UN Charter and an “occupying power” to provide humanitarian aid to Gazans.
Israel maintains that it is not occupying Gaza and has not held governmental authority in the Strip since 2005.
The court will also examine whether Israel breached the immunities afforded to UN agencies by banning Unrwa.
Representatives of the Netanyahu government are not attending the hearings but it has submitted a written defence, the contents of which are not year public.
However, an idea of its objections have been provided by a paper produced by UK Lawyers for Israel in regard to the case, which argued that Israel had the right to unilaterally terminate its agreement with Unrwa and to determine which agencies act within its sovereign territory.
It also suggested that Israel can deliver aid in whichever manner it chooses, so long as its humanitarian obligations are met, and is not required to do so through Unrwa.
It should be noted that any ruling issued by the ICJ in the case will be advisory and not legally binding on Israel. A previous ruling last year declaring Israel’s occupation of the West Bank unlawful has largely gone unheeded, with Israel disputing the court’s neutrality and capacity to rule on such cases.
