Germany asks the ICJ to throw out Nicaragua's Gaza arms case

Germany opened four days of hearings at the International Court of Justice on Monday, asking judges to dismiss Nicaragua's case that Berlin facilitated genocide in Gaza by arming and backing Israel. The sitting at the Peace Palace runs from 7 to 10 September and deals only with jurisdiction and admissibility, the preliminary objections Germany filed after Nicaragua sued on 1 March 2024.

Monday morning was Germany's first round. Tuesday is Nicaragua. Each side has a shorter second round on Wednesday and Thursday evenings. A decision on these objections usually takes about six months. If Germany wins, the file closes. If it loses, the Court moves to the merits, a process that would run for years.

What Nicaragua put on the table

Nicaragua says Germany breached the 1948 Genocide Convention, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and peremptory humanitarian law by giving Israel political, financial and military support and by cutting funds to UNRWA. It asked the Court in 2024 for emergency orders to stop German military exports. The judges refused in April 2024, saying the facts as they then stood did not justify provisional measures.

Israel is not a party to this case. The South Africa v. Israel genocide case is a separate file. In that one the Court has given South Africa until November 2027 to file its written pleadings and Israel until May 2029 to reply. Hearings on whether Israel committed genocide are not expected before late 2029. Nicaragua's case against Germany is the side door: a claim against a supplier rather than against the state fighting in Gaza.

What Germany will argue

Berlin denies the facts and the law. Tania von Uslar-Gleichen, who leads the German legal team, has already told the Court that Nicaragua's claims have no basis. The preliminary objections will be more technical. Typical arguments in this kind of case are that Nicaragua lacks standing, that the Court has no jurisdiction under the Genocide Convention on these facts, and that the dispute is not with Germany.

German export policy has moved during the case. Berlin paused some licences for equipment that could be used in Gaza, then later restored a path for approvals. That record will be read both ways. Nicaragua will call it proof that Germany knew the risk. Germany will call it proof that it applied its own law and is not a co-author of Israeli operations.

Why the week matters even before a judgment

A jurisdictional fight is dry. It is also the only Gaza-related argument the Peace Palace is hearing this month. A finding that the Court can hear the case would keep German arms policy under oath for years. A finding that it cannot would close one of the few live inter-state cases that treats European supply as a legal act rather than a political choice.

None of this decides the South Africa file. None of it names individual German officials. The question this week is narrower and still heavy: whether a third state can be sued at the ICJ for the way it armed a partner during an alleged genocide, before that genocide case itself has been tried.

The Court will not answer on Thursday. It will hear the four sessions, then write. The date that matters after this week is the one on the preliminary objections judgment. Until then the record is oral argument, not a holding.