Germany in the dock? Berlin asks UN court to kill Nicaragua’s Israel arms case

Germany has asked the International Court of Justice to dismiss a case brought by Nicaragua over Berlin’s military support and arms sales to Israel, arguing that Nicaragua failed to properly notify Germany of its allegations before approaching the court.

Nicaragua has accused Germany of violating the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law by allegedly facilitating acts of genocide in Gaza. Israel, which is not a party to the proceedings, has strongly rejected allegations that its military campaign amounts to genocide.

Germany challenges Nicaragua’s case

Germany’s legal team told judges at the ICJ in The Hague that Nicaragua had not properly followed the process required before bringing the dispute to court.

Germany’s top lawyer, Julia Monar, argued that Nicaragua appeared unwilling to hear Germany’s position before starting proceedings. Another German lawyer, Antonios Tzanakopoulos, said Nicaragua had sent its formal notification from a Yahoo email address to a general government inbox rather than through diplomatic channels.

Germany is asking the 16-judge panel to throw out the case on those grounds.

Berlin defends arms export policy

Germany has been one of Israel’s strongest European supporters and is its second-largest arms supplier after the United States.

Monar told the court that Germany carefully examines military equipment exports under international law. She said Germany had not authorised an export of weapons of war since 2024 with Israel as the final destination if those weapons could be used in the Gaza conflict.

The ICJ rejected Nicaragua’s emergency request in 2024 for Germany to stop military and other assistance to Israel. However, the court did not dismiss the wider case at that stage, meaning the legal proceedings have continued.

Case adds to wider Gaza legal scrutiny

The Nicaragua-Germany proceedings form part of a growing series of international legal cases connected to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

South Africa separately brought a genocide case against Israel at the ICJ in 2023. In January 2024, the court ordered Israel to take measures to prevent acts covered by the Genocide Convention and later ordered steps to improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza.

South Africa has argued that Israel has failed to comply fully with those orders. Israel denies the genocide allegations.

The ICJ has not yet made a final ruling on whether Israel committed genocide in Gaza. Such cases can take years to reach a final judgment.

ICJ and ICC cases are separate

The proceedings at the ICJ should not be confused with cases at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which prosecutes individuals rather than states.

ICC judges have issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant in connection with alleged crimes against humanity during the Gaza conflict. The allegations include the use of starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally targeting civilians. Israeli officials have rejected the accusations.

The United States has responded to the ICC proceedings by imposing sanctions on several senior court officials.

Why the Germany case matters

The Nicaragua case places Germany’s relationship with Israel under additional international legal scrutiny while the Gaza conflict continues to generate disputes over arms transfers, humanitarian obligations and international law.

A ruling on Germany’s request to dismiss the case would determine whether Nicaragua’s allegations can proceed further at the ICJ. The wider proceedings could also contribute to international debate over the legal responsibilities of countries supplying military equipment to states involved in armed conflicts.

Why Germany wants the case dismissed: Berlin is primarily challenging the admissibility and procedure of Nicaragua’s case, arguing that Nicaragua did not properly attempt to resolve the dispute before taking it to the ICJ.

Why arms transfers are central: Nicaragua argues that Germany’s military support to Israel could make Berlin legally responsible for facilitating violations of the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law. Germany disputes that characterisation and says its export decisions comply with international law.

How this differs from South Africa’s case: South Africa’s case directly concerns Israel and alleged violations of the Genocide Convention. Nicaragua’s case targets Germany’s conduct as an alleged supporter of Israel, making the legal question different.

Why the proceedings could take years: ICJ cases involving state responsibility are lengthy. The court must first address jurisdiction and admissibility before potentially considering the substance of the allegations.