Germany has asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to dismiss a case brought by Nicaragua accusing Berlin of violating the 1948 Genocide Convention by supplying weapons to Israel.
Germany temporarily suspended some arms exports to Israel in 2025, but deliveries have since resumed. The dispute comes amid continuing international scrutiny of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. A US-backed ceasefire that took effect in October 2025 halted large-scale fighting, but Israeli strikes have continued.
Nicaragua argues that Germany’s military support for Israel could breach its obligations under the Genocide Convention, which requires states to take measures to prevent genocide. The case is unusual because neither Nicaragua nor Germany is directly involved in the Gaza conflict.
Israel rejects allegations that it is committing genocide, describing them as politically motivated, and says its military operations are directed against Hamas, whose October 2023 attack on Israel triggered the war.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
Germany’s Jurisdiction Argument
Germany’s main defense is that the ICJ should not hear Nicaragua’s claims because the case does not meet the court’s jurisdictional requirements. Berlin argues that Nicaragua failed to take the necessary steps before bringing the dispute to the court and that parts of Nicaragua’s case fall outside the jurisdiction granted to the ICJ under the Genocide Convention.
Germany has therefore asked the court to reject Nicaragua’s claims before the case can proceed to consideration of the substantive allegations.
Nicaragua will have an opportunity to respond to Germany’s objections and argue why the case should move forward.
Link to South Africa’s Case
Nicaragua’s lawsuit draws heavily on the broader legal dispute surrounding Israel’s conduct in Gaza. South Africa previously brought a case against Israel at the ICJ, alleging violations of the Genocide Convention.
In an interim ruling in 2024, the court found that some of the rights claimed by South Africa under the Genocide Convention were plausible and ordered provisional measures. Israel has rejected the allegations and maintains that it is complying with international law and exercising its right to self-defense.
The underlying South African case is not expected to reach a full hearing until late 2029, illustrating how lengthy proceedings involving allegations under the Genocide Convention can become.
Why It Matters
The case could have significant implications for arms transfers, state responsibility and international humanitarian law. If Nicaragua’s case proceeds, the ICJ could eventually be asked to examine whether a state that supplies weapons to a country accused of genocide can itself incur international responsibility.
It also places Germany’s long-standing political and security support for Israel under greater legal scrutiny. Berlin must balance its relationship with Israel and its stated commitment to international law against growing pressure over the humanitarian situation in Gaza.
More broadly, the proceedings could influence how other countries assess their own military exports to states involved in major armed conflicts.
Key Stakeholders
The main stakeholders are Germany, Nicaragua, Israel, the International Court of Justice and Palestinians in Gaza. The case also has wider implications for countries that provide weapons or military assistance to parties involved in armed conflicts.
The United Nations and international humanitarian and human rights organisations are likely to closely monitor the proceedings because the court’s eventual interpretation could affect future disputes concerning the obligations of third-party states.
What’s Next
The ICJ is expected to rule later this year on Germany’s preliminary objection concerning jurisdiction. If the court accepts Germany’s argument, Nicaragua’s case would effectively be halted. If the judges reject the objection, the case could proceed toward consideration of its substantive claims.
Even if Nicaragua succeeds in keeping the case alive, a final ruling on the merits could take years.
The proceedings will therefore become an important test of how far international law can hold countries accountable for their conduct when they are not directly participating in a conflict but provide military support to one of the parties.
With information from Reuters.
