What Germany asks the Court to decline
Germany's preliminary objections reached The Hague in four parts: that no legal dispute existed between the two states when Nicaragua filed; that some claims fall outside the temporal limits of Germany's acceptance of the Court's jurisdiction; that Israel is an indispensable third party whose conduct cannot be adjudicated without it; and that the Monetary Gold principle stops the Court deciding the case without first determining Israel's responsibility. Nicaragua answered on Tuesday that the case concerns Germany's own conduct and its obligations under the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law. Ambassador Carlos Arguello Gomez appeared for Nicaragua with counsel Alain Pellet and Ardi Imseis.[1]
A preliminary objection such as the Monetary Gold one is settled before anything about the shipments themselves is examined. If the objections succeed, the case ends without the Court reaching Germany's own decisions at all; if they are dismissed, those decisions become the subject of a merits phase that can run for years. A second reading is available: the Court can join the objections to the merits, which postpones the same question instead of answering it.[1]
A group at NATO headquarters, without its founder
The International Contact Group on Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response met at NATO headquarters in Brussels on Thursday. The United States, which established the coalition with the Netherlands in 2023, did not take part, and the United Kingdom and the Netherlands now lead it. Inside the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dismantled the civilian protection mission that carried the American side of that work.[2]
Put side by side, the two proceedings contest the same thing at different addresses. In The Hague, Germany asks the Court to decline the case because Israel is not before it, which would leave Germany's own decisions unexamined there. At NATO headquarters in Brussels, the state that established the civilian harm group has stopped sitting at its table. Neither step changes what the Genocide Convention or international humanitarian law requires of a supplier; each narrows the place where compliance can be examined.[1], [2]
Where the reach is decided
Nicaragua is scheduled to close its argument on Thursday, after which the Court takes the objections away to decide. If the judges rule on the objections instead of joining them to the merits, the observable signal is a judgment on the Monetary Gold and jurisdiction objections entered on the Court's file for this case, and its operative paragraphs will state whether Germany's own conduct can be examined at all. Until that text exists, the reach of the Genocide Convention over a supplying state stays an open question.[1]