Likewise, EVEN IN THIS VERY POST, anything about Hamas and Palestinians is deliberately left out. You see, the ICJ has 3 demands, not one.
1) immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, ("living and dead" has been added in this release)
2) delivering the guilty to the court (even though they haven't named individuals, in other words, they're giving Hamas yet another chance to stop this by just throwing a few of their members under the bus)
3) Israel must make sure it's operation in Rafah doesn't devolve into genocide
Israel is mad that these demands are independent, and not connected (in other words, they're saying they're perfectly happy to stop the war immediately and even rebuild Gaza if 1 and 2 happen)
(and then of course the implicit fourth demand that Hamas, and everyone else, respect UN agreed international borders and stops attacking Israel, now and forever)
The court made these demands knowing full well that there is ZERO chance that anything will happen on demand 1 and 2. And they modified their own laws (illegally) to allow for 3 to even be demanded (they modified their own jurisdiction because Palestine is a member without territory, which means 6 months ago, Gaza was outside of ICJ jurisdiction).
What's illegal about that change? Only the security council has the right to change their statutes, and of course, that's not happening.
This is a court that illegally modified it's own rules in order to convict Jews. Frankly ... after that I'm just not reading any further.
And if you do think further, Palestine is a signatory of the Rome statute. Which means Palestinians agreed to do what the court demands, which in this case is deliver the hostages and the leaders of Hamas. Hamas, going for elections, agreed to this too, btw. Neither Hamas, nor the PA, nor Palestinians obviously have ANY intention to comply, and yet, the court is not throwing them out, and "their" complaint is still getting treated. How is this fair?
And there you get to the issue of enforcement. Hamas agreed to uphold international treaties in order to participate in the election in 2006, and obviously, it didn't take a week before the first large-scale warcrimes (Palestinian-on-Palestinian). The UN didn't do anything. After the Israel-Lebanon war, the UN even sent soldiers to Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah. Well, Hezbollah isn't disarmed in case you didn't notice. Nobody is demanding enforcement, not on the street, not in the UN.
But NOW, when these warcrimes have forced a response from Israel, NOW you want enforcement? And not against Hamas/Hezbollah, but against Israel?
Fuck that.
And there is a basic legal principle, namely that one-sided enforcement of law by a court is not allowed. A court cannot, not even implicitly, punish one party to a crime without punishing the other party too. This court, or any court, cannot be allowed to punish Israel without punishing Hamas (and quite a few others).
And then there's yet another legal principle, that a court is not allowed to make judgements or demands it has zero hope to execute. In other words: if the court has no options for enforcement, it should stay out of it.
Like always we come to the only possible conclusion: this can only be stopped by Hamas, Hezbollah, and maybe Iran. This court, like everything else the UN does, is a joke.
The basic problem with war in general is always the same. If ONE party believes they are at war, TWO parties are at war. Just ask the Ukrainians, they can explain it better than I can.
There is also a deliberate propaganda effort to blur the distinction between Hamas and Palestinians. Look at every conservative news source that reports on pro-Palestinian protests. Every one of them uses the term "Pro-Hamas protestors" instead, even though you'll find very few people there who support Hamas terrorists. This is clearly deliberate.
See also the deliberate conflation of IDF = Israeli government = Israeli people = the Jewish Ethnicity = Judaism. So, thanks to propaganda, if you oppose one of them, they think you oppose them all and are antisemitic.