THE HAGUE — Germany has returned to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to challenge Nicaragua’s legal case accusing Berlin of violating international law by providing military support to Israel during the Gaza conflict.

Hearings opened in The Hague on September 7 and are scheduled to continue through September 10. Germany is asking the United Nations’ highest court for international disputes to reject the case, arguing that the allegations are unfounded and that the court lacks jurisdiction.

Nicaragua Accuses Germany of Supporting Genocide

Nicaragua brought the proceedings against Germany in 2024, arguing that German military exports and other support for Israel breached obligations under the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law.

The Central American country argues that Germany could not ignore the situation in Gaza while continuing to provide military assistance to Israel. The case therefore places Germany’s arms-export policy under international legal scrutiny, even though Israel itself is not a party to the proceedings.

Germany strongly rejects the allegations.

Berlin maintains that its exports are governed by strict licensing procedures and that Nicaragua’s legal arguments do not establish a basis for holding Germany responsible for alleged violations committed by another state.

Germany Wants the Case Dismissed

The current hearings are focused primarily on Germany’s preliminary objections, rather than determining whether genocide has occurred in Gaza.

Germany argues that the ICJ should not proceed with Nicaragua’s broader claims. The court itself announced in July that public hearings on Germany’s preliminary objections would take place from September 7 through September 10.

That means the immediate legal question is whether Nicaragua’s case can proceed, rather than whether the allegations against Germany have been proven.

Earlier Emergency Request Was Rejected

The dispute has already been before the ICJ once.

In April 2024, the court rejected Nicaragua’s request for emergency provisional measures that would have required Germany to take immediate steps concerning its military assistance to Israel. However, the judges did not dismiss Nicaragua’s case entirely, allowing the broader proceedings to continue.

The distinction is important because the earlier ruling did not settle the underlying legal dispute.

The latest hearings therefore represent another stage in a case that could take years to reach a final judgment.

Germany’s Defense Focuses on Its Export System

Berlin has emphasized that military exports to Israel are subject to German legal controls and individual licensing decisions.

During earlier proceedings, German representatives told the court that most licensed exports after October 2023 involved equipment classified as military equipment rather than major offensive weapons. Germany also argued that its licensing system takes international-law obligations into account.

Germany has also disputed Nicaragua’s interpretation of the scale and nature of the assistance provided.

The government says its relationship with Israel includes a long-standing security commitment, but insists that this does not remove Germany’s obligation to examine exports under its own laws and international commitments.

The Case Has Wider European Implications

The proceedings have significance beyond Germany.

European governments have faced increasing pressure to explain their military relationships with Israel as the humanitarian and political consequences of the Gaza conflict continue to generate international scrutiny.

The ICJ case could eventually contribute to broader debates over when a state supplying weapons or other military assistance can become legally responsible for actions carried out by the recipient state.

That question could affect future arms-export decisions in Europe and elsewhere.

Separate From South Africa’s Case Against Israel

The Nicaragua-Germany case is legally separate from the genocide proceedings brought by South Africa directly against Israel.

The South Africa case concerns Israel’s own alleged responsibilities under the Genocide Convention. Nicaragua’s case instead examines Germany’s alleged obligations in connection with its support for Israel.

The two cases nevertheless overlap politically because both involve allegations arising from the Gaza conflict.

The ICJ has stressed through its procedures that cases between states can take considerable time before reaching a final judgment.

Israel Is Not a Party to This Case

Another important distinction is that Israel is not a respondent in the Nicaragua-Germany proceedings.

The legal dispute is between Nicaragua and Germany. Nicaragua’s allegations concerning Germany’s conduct are connected to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, but the court is not being asked in this case to determine Israel’s responsibility as a party to the proceedings.

Israel has consistently rejected accusations that its military campaign constitutes genocide.

Germany’s Position Comes Under Increased Scrutiny

The case arrives at a time when Germany’s relationship with Israel is receiving renewed attention.

Germany has historically described Israel’s security as an important element of its foreign policy, while simultaneously facing domestic and international pressure over arms exports and the humanitarian consequences of the Gaza war.

The ICJ proceedings place those competing considerations directly into an international legal forum.

What Happens After the Hearings?

The court is expected to consider Germany’s preliminary objections before deciding whether Nicaragua’s claims can proceed.

A ruling on jurisdiction would not necessarily determine the ultimate merits of Nicaragua’s accusations. If the court allows the case to continue, further written submissions and legal proceedings could follow before any final judgment.

The process could therefore extend for years.

For now, the Hague hearings represent a significant test of how international law treats states that provide military support to countries accused of serious violations of international humanitarian law.

The outcome could have implications not only for Germany and Nicaragua, but also for governments around the world that supply weapons to states involved in armed conflicts.