Managua urged judges to reject German objections, highlighting Berlin’s own duties to prevent genocide and other grave violations against Palestinians
Sondos Asem is a journalist and news editor at Middle East Eye in London. She is a specialist in international law, human rights and public policy in the Middle East and North Africa
Cross-posted from Middle East Eye
The Agent of Nicaragua, Mr Carlos Arguello Gomez, speaks at the International Court of Justice in the Hague on Tuesday 8 September 2026 (UN Photo/ICJ/Frank van Beek)
Nicaragua has accused Germany of trying to shield its support for Israel from judicial scrutiny, telling the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Berlin continued to authorise substantial military exports despite knowing of the serious risk of genocide and other violations against Palestinians .
Appearing before the court in The Hague on Tuesday, Nicaragua urged judges to reject Germany’s preliminary objections and allow its case against Berlin to proceed to the merits.
The proceedings concern Germany’s alleged breaches of the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law in relation to its alleged support for Israel’s conduct in occupied Palestine.
Nicaragua filed the case in March 2024, accusing Germany of facilitating genocide by supplying Israel with weapons and suspending funding to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, Unrwa.
Tuesday’s hearing focused on Berlin’s arguments that the court lacks jurisdiction or that Nicaragua’s claims are inadmissible.
Germany has argued, among other things, that no legal dispute existed between the two countries when Nicaragua filed the case, that some claims fall outside the temporal limits of its acceptance of the court’s jurisdiction, and that Israel is an indispensable third party whose conduct cannot be adjudicated in its absence.
Nicaragua rejected each objection, insisting that the case concerns Germany’s own conduct and obligations, not Israel’s.
Nicaragua’s ambassador to the Netherlands, Carlos Arguello Gomez, told the court that Managua was invoking Germany’s responsibility in connection with alleged breaches of the Genocide Convention, international humanitarian law, the Palestinian right to self-determination, and the prohibitions of racial discrimination, racial segregation and apartheid.
The claims also include alleged violations of Germany’s duties not to recognise or assist serious breaches of international law, and to investigate, prosecute and punish international crimes, such as war crimes and genocide.
Nicaragua’s legal team attending a hearing at the ICJ on 8 September 2026 (ICJ photo)
Nicaragua has accused Germany of trying to shield its support for Israel from judicial scrutiny, telling the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Berlin continued to authorise substantial military exports despite knowing of the serious risk of genocide and other violations against Palestinians .
Appearing before the court in The Hague on Tuesday, Nicaragua urged judges to reject Germany’s preliminary objections and allow its case against Berlin to proceed to the merits.
The proceedings concern Germany’s alleged breaches of the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law in relation to its alleged support for Israel’s conduct in occupied Palestine.
Nicaragua filed the case in March 2024, accusing Germany of facilitating genocide by supplying Israel with weapons and suspending funding to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, Unrwa.
Tuesday’s hearing focused on Berlin’s arguments that the court lacks jurisdiction or that Nicaragua’s claims are inadmissible.
Germany has argued, among other things, that no legal dispute existed between the two countries when Nicaragua filed the case, that some claims fall outside the temporal limits of its acceptance of the court’s jurisdiction, and that Israel is an indispensable third party whose conduct cannot be adjudicated in its absence.
Nicaragua rejected each objection, insisting that the case concerns Germany’s own conduct and obligations, not Israel’s.
Nicaragua’s ambassador to the Netherlands, Carlos Arguello Gomez, told the court that Managua was invoking Germany’s responsibility in connection with alleged breaches of the Genocide Convention, international humanitarian law, the Palestinian right to self-determination, and the prohibitions of racial discrimination, racial segregation and apartheid.
The claims also include alleged violations of Germany’s duties not to recognise or assist serious breaches of international law, and to investigate, prosecute and punish international crimes, such as war crimes and genocide.
Nicaragua’s legal team attending a hearing at the ICJ on 8 September 2026 (ICJ photo)
Arguello said that, unlike under Nazi Germany, the destruction and suffering inflicted on Palestinians had been documented publicly and “livestreamed”, making it impossible for the German government to argue that it did not know of the risk of grave violations.
“Over the past three years, every single day people around the world bear witness to horrible scenes of brutality, suffering and destruction,” he said. “Schoolchildren in Germany are probably more aware today of what is happening in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and particularly the Gaza Strip, than their ancestors were of the horrors during the Nazi regime.”
Germany’s close political, commercial and military relations with Israel meant it “could not [but] be aware, or normally should have been aware”, of the serious risk that acts amounting to genocide were being committed, he said.
Germany is Israel’s second-largest arms supplier and one of its most important trading partners, giving Berlin substantial means to influence its conduct, Nicaragua argued.
Arms exports continue
Nicaragua recalled that in its April 2024 order declining to impose provisional measures against Germany, the ICJ nevertheless reminded all states of their obligations regarding arms transfers to parties to armed conflicts.
The court said those obligations were incumbent on Germany in its supply of weapons to Israel. Nicaragua said Berlin had ignored that warning.
It disputed Germany’s earlier claim that 98 percent of the exports in question consisted of subordinate or protective equipment. According to figures presented by Nicaragua, Germany authorised more than €1.15bn ($1.34bn) in military exports to Israel between early April 2024 and the end of June 2026.
In the first half of 2026 alone, Germany approved almost €800m in military exports, Nicaragua said. Information released by the German government shortly before the hearing indicated that €508.8m of this amount related to weapons of war.
The licences included a major maritime defence project, believed to involve a submarine, as well as ammunition, projectiles, propelling charges and other essential components.
Nicaragua also highlighted German-made engines and transmission systems used in Israel’s Merkava tanks, which have been deployed extensively in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
The total value of German military equipment authorised for export to Israel since 7 October 2023 had exceeded €1.5bn ($1.75bn), Nicaragua told the court.
Berlin announced in August 2025 that it would suspend new authorisations for military equipment that could be used in Gaza. Nicaragua described the measure as largely symbolic because deliveries under previously approved licences were allowed to continue. New approvals resumed in November 2025.
Germany’s assurances that it assesses each licence separately and receives guarantees from Israel that equipment will be used in accordance with international humanitarian law did not discharge its international obligations, Nicaragua said.
Arguello also pointed to the extensive trade flowing in the other direction. Germany’s agreement to purchase Israel’s Arrow 3 missile defence system, originally valued at $3.5bn, was expanded in December, bringing its value to approximately $6.6bn.
“This was described as the largest defence export contract in Israel’s history,” said Arguello.
Nicaragua argued that these contracts created a mutually profitable, long-term military relationship that helped insulate Israel from sanctions.
Arguello challenged Germany’s assertion that its support for Israel formed part of its reason of state, or “Staatsrason”, arising from its historic responsibility for the Holocaust.
“The trial of the war criminals at Nuremberg was for multiple crimes against humanity as a whole and not only for the Jewish Shoah,” he said. “If there is a sincere moral imperative justifying this raison d’état, it must be for the responsibility for all these crimes against humanity, and it should involve the obligation to do all possible to stop this from happening to other human beings.
“A sincere raison d’état would see Germany doing everything possible to stop the crimes being committed by Israel against the Palestinian people.”
Germany’s duty to prevent genocide
Germany’s key objection is based on the “Monetary Gold principle”, under which the ICJ generally cannot decide a case if the legal responsibility of an absent, non-consenting state would constitute the very subject matter of its judgment.
Germany argues that the court could not decide whether Berlin failed to prevent or facilitated violations without first determining that Israel committed the underlying wrongful acts.
Nicaragua rejected that argument, saying it had not asked the court to adjudge that Israel was responsible or to issue any ruling binding Israel.
Its submissions ask the court to determine whether Germany breached its own obligations and to order Berlin to make full reparation for harm caused by its own internationally wrongful acts.
Israel’s conduct was the factual background against which Germany’s actions would be assessed, but the case did not require a ruling on Israel’s international responsibility, Nicaragua’s counsel Alain Pellet said.
For many of Nicaragua’s claims, it was sufficient to establish that there was a serious risk of genocide or other grave violations, rather than proving conclusively that Israel was responsible for genocide.
The obligation to prevent genocide arises when a state knows, or should normally know, of a serious risk that genocide will be committed, Nicaragua said. From that point, it must use all means reasonably available to deter or prevent it.
This is an obligation of conduct, rather than a guarantee that the prohibited outcome will be avoided.
Nicaragua said Germany’s capacity to influence Israel was “indisputable” because of the close political, military and economic ties between the two states.
Pellet acknowledged that the ICJ had previously said in 2007 that a state could ultimately be held responsible for failing to prevent genocide only if genocide had in fact occurred. But he argued that the duty to act arises earlier, at the moment a serious risk becomes known.
“The obligation to prevent and the corresponding duty to act arise for a state at the moment when it becomes aware, or should normally have become aware, of the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed,” he said.
Waiting until genocide or crimes against humanity had been completed before addressing a failure to prevent them would be “absurd” he said, as it would defeat the purpose of the relevant obligations.
Nicaragua stressed that the serious risk had now materialised and that genocide was continuing in Gaza and elsewhere in occupied Palestine.
“Tragically, genocide has occurred and continues to occur, not only in the Gaza Strip but throughout the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem,” Pellet told the court in a French-language presentation.
“The gravest violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, which all states have the duty – the legal obligation – to prevent, are continuing; and the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination is being denied more than ever.”
Apartheid and racial discrimination
Nicaragua also defended the court’s jurisdiction over its claims concerning racial discrimination, racial segregation and apartheid.
Counsel Ardi Imseis said these prohibitions did not arise solely from the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Cerd). They also formed part of customary international law, international humanitarian law and other treaty obligations.
The ICJ has previously recognised the prohibition of racial discrimination as an obligation owed to the international community as a whole. It has also held that the prohibition is a fundamental component of humanitarian law.
Claims arising under these independent bodies of law consequently fell within Germany’s optional declaration accepting the court’s jurisdiction, Nicaragua argued.
Germany has argued that key claims fall outside its declaration accepting ICJ jurisdiction only over disputes concerning facts or situations after 30 April 2008.
But Nicaragua said the “real cause” of the case was Berlin’s recent conduct, particularly its arms-export approvals and other support for Israel after October 2023, while the countries’ longstanding relationship was merely historical background.
Nicaragua is due to present its second round of oral arguments on Thursday, when it will also deliver its final submissions.
If the court accepts Nicaragua’s arguments, the case will go ahead, but it could take years for it to reach a final judgment.
The ICJ is currently hearing a separate case brought by South Africa against Israel, accusing it of breaching the Genocide Convention in its war on Gaza since October 2023.
A panel of eminent UN experts, as well as the world’s largest association of genocide scholars, have already concluded that Israel’s campaign in Gaza amounted to the crime of genocide.
A fragile, US-brokered ceasefire has been in effect since October last year. But since then, Israel has killed at least 1,300 Palestinians in Gaza, bringing the genocide’s death toll to over 73,651. Thousands more are missing and presumed dead under the rubble.
BRAVE NEW EUROPE is one of the very few Resistance Media in Europe. We publish expert analyses and reports by some of the leading thinkers from across the world who you will not find in state and corporate mainstream media. Support us in our work.
To donate please go HERE .
Sondos Asem – How Nicaragua defended its ICJ case accusing Germany of complicity in Israel’s genocide
Aggregated summary from an independent source. Read the original at BraveNewEurope.