Who brought the case to the court?
The UN General Assembly, where pro-Palestinian sentiment is strong, adopted a resolution on December 8th, 2003, requesting the court to rule on this question: "What are the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel ... considering the rules and principles of international law ... and relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions?"
Who has been involved in the case?
Forty-four UN member-states, including Israel, the United States and 10 European Union countries submitted written statements on the case, but only 15 oral statements were made at public hearings in February, which opened with the Palestinian submission, supported by several developing countries, the Arab League and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference.
Who gave the advisory opinion?
Shi Jiuyong of China, president of the court and head of its panel of judges, read the ruling. The other judges are from Madagascar, Venezuela, France, Sierra Leone, Russia, Britain, the Netherlands, Brazil, Jordan, the United States, Egypt, Japan, Germany and Slovakia.
What was the opinion?
The court called on the UN Security Council and General Assembly to stop construction of the barrier.
How do the judges decide?
The court says it bases its rulings on international treaties and conventions, international custom and the general principles of law, as well as prior judicial decisions.
What power does the court have?
The court's advisory opinions are non-binding, but Israel fears a finding against it will be so influential as to prompt efforts in the UN General Assembly to lobby for international action such as sanctions.
Are there any precedents?
In 1971, the ICJ ruled on the legal consequences of South Africa's occupation of South West Africa, now Namibia. As Israel has done, South Africa argued that the World Court was not competent to rule on the case, a view rejected by the court. However, in South Africa's case, the UN Security Council had already declared the occupation of South West Africa illegal, a fact the World Court took as the basis of its ruling that UN member-states should take action against South Africa. In Israel's case, the Security Council has not condemned the barrier. - (Reuters)