Israel Violates Legal Obligations by Attacking Hospitals and Medical Personnel: Sugiono

The Hague: Indonesia Minister of Foreign Affairs Sugiono emphasizes that Israel has the obligation to facilitate and provide every assistance to the United Nations (UN) as well as other international organizations and third states.

Among others are obligation to take all necessary and effective measures to ensure the unhindered provision of the urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance; to immediately halt military offensive and any other action which may inflict on the Palestinian people; and to maintain the opening of the Rafah crossing for unhindered provision of the urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance.

As a matter of law, those obligations imposed by the Court have a binding effect upon Israel by virtue of Article 94 paragraph 1 of the UN Charter. This binding effect has also been affirmed by this Court in its 2001 judgment of the LaGrand’s case.

“I wish to stress that, as failure to perform the above-mentioned obligations would result in the suffering of innocent civilians, particularly the vulnerable groups such as the elderly, women and children, and Israel’s non-fulfillment of those obligations constitutes a violation of human rights obligations,” said Minister Sugiono in public hearing of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Obligation of Israel in Relation to the Presence and Activities of United Nations in The Hague, Wednesday, April 30, 2025.

“Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) establishes that human rights protection does not stop during armed conflict. And as this Court determined in its 2004 Wall Advisory Opinion, both international humanitarian law and international human rights law are applicable in times of armed conflict,” stated Minister Sugiono.

“Having pointed out all the above, Indonesia emphasizes that the issue we deliberated is not a matter of political exigency nor it merely a moral inquiry, but one that is grounded in international law, upon which Israel is legally bound to discharge its obligations in good faith and without reservation,” he added.

Israel status beyond dispute

In front of the ICJ Judges, Minister Sugiono explain Indonesia’s submission regarding Israel’s obligations as an Occupying Power. Israel’s status as an Occupying Power in the Palestinian Territory, including Gaza, is a matter beyond dispute. It has been affirmed by this Court and by countless resolutions of the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly.

This determination has also been made by the Court’s previous advisory opinions of 9 July 2004 and 19 July 2024. As an occupying power, Israel’s legal obligations extend beyond the general duties owed by all states under international law.

The Fourth Geneva Convention governs the protection of civilians during times of armed conflict and occupation, and it places specific duties on Israel with respect to the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian population in the Occupied Palestine Territory (OPT). The language of this convention is clear: that Israel is bound to uphold at all times and under all circumstances those obligations.

It is important to highlight that those obligations are rooted in customary international law and have been consistently reinforced by international legal precedent.

“With regard to this Fourth Geneva Convention, Indonesia respectfully submits that Israel is duty bound at least to First, ensure the provision of basic supplies; Second, to accept and facilitate relief schemes; Third, maintain medical Services and protect humanitarian personnel; Fourth, not conduct any forms of collective punishment; and Fifth, not forcibly transfer and deport civilian population,” said Sugiono.

“Indonesia submits that Israel is bound to comply with its obligations to ensure basic supplies as provided for under Articles 50 and 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention,” he stated.

In particular, Israel must ensure that the civilian population in the OPT is provided with essential supplies, including food, medical care, and other necessary services, and this obligation goes further to underscore the positive duty to maintain special protections for vulnerable groups, including children under fifteen, expectant mothers, and mothers of young children.

Israel cannot ignore these responsibilities as they are unequivocal and opposable to Israel as the occupying power. Failure to meet these obligations would have grave consequences for the civilian population and constitute a breach of Israel’s duties under international law.

Second, Israel is obliged to agree on relief schemes, especially to fulfill basic necessities as provided under Articles 38, 59, and 62 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

This obligation extends to Israel, as the occupying power, to cooperate with international humanitarian agencies to establish relief schemes for the provision of food, medical care, and other essential services.

This obligation becomes even more crucial as the civilian population is inadequately supplied. The spirit of these provisions is clear: humanitarian aid must be facilitated by the occupying power, not obstructed.

It becomes evidently clear, that Israel does not fulfill this obligation. Moreover, Israel played a pivotal part in the unfolding of the biggest humanitarian catastrophe of this decade, if not this century.

The entire Palestinian territory has been living with persistently low living standards, being denied access to water, food, and energy. Third, the Geneva Conventions also imposed strict obligations on Israel to protect medical facilities, healthcare personnel, and the provision of healthcare services under Articles 14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 30, 47, 53, 56, and 63 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

“These include ensuring that hospitals are not attacked and that medical personnel can carry out their work without interference. These duties are not optional. At this juncture, Israel has clearly failed to respect those obligation,” said Minister Sugiono.

Indonesia wishes to highlight the fact that one of these failures was evident in the event of Israel’s attack towards the Indonesian hospital in Gaza in 2023. This attack was perpetrated against one of the most critical health infrastructures in Gaza, despite the fact that there were patients being treated.

Fourth, Israel is also duty bound to not perpetrate collective punishment under Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Collective punishment is prohibited, and any policy or practice that imposes collective punishment is a violation of these rules. Israel must therefore ensure that any measure taken in the OPT does not punish the civilian population collectively.

The legal principle is clear: individuals should not suffer for the actions of others. However, the reality speaks a horrible truth. The imposition of a total siege by Israel—cutting off electricity, water, food, and medicine —punishes the entire civilian population of Gaza for the actions of a few.

Statements by high-ranking Israeli officials that assign collective guilt to “an entire nation” reinforce the conclusion that such measures are intended to punish civilians indiscriminately. This is not only illegal but morally indefensible. 7 Fifth, Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the transfer or deportation of civilians from the OPT.

This provision is designed to protect the integrity of the Palestinian population and to ensure that they are not forcibly displaced from their homes. Any measures relating to evacuations may only occur for imperative military reasons, and even then, must be temporary and non-destructive of the civilian population’s rights.

“Israel must respect this obligation and refrain from engaging in any actions that would lead to the unlawful transfer of civilians from the occupied territory. Yet what we have witnessed in Gaza is a de facto policy of permanent dispossession,” added Sugiono.

Sugiono also stated that Israel is deliberately conducting a policy of forced mass displacement, accompanied by the destruction of civilian infrastructure. More than 66% of buildings in Gaza were destroyed, and the requirement to return displaced persons to their homes has been rendered meaningless.