“Israel” appointed Ron Shapira as its ad hoc judge to participate in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) deliberations, replacing Aharon Barak, who recently vacated his position citing personal reasons.

Shapira’s appointment sparked significant controversy due to his combative stance towards the ICJ and his perceived lack of international judicial experience.

In January, the ICJ issued an interim ruling directing “Israel” to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza, a decision contested by only two judges, including Barak.

The ICJ, consisting of 15 permanent judges, allows parties involved in a case to nominate additional judges.

Shapira currently serves as the rector of the Peres Academic Center and lectures at Bar-Ilan and Tel Aviv universities. He is also affiliated with the Israel Law and Liberty Forum, known for training conservative judges.

Critics note Shapira’s limited international judicial background compared to Barak, a prominent former attorney general and High Court president.

Eitan Diamond from the Diakonia International Humanitarian Law Centre emphasized Barak’s extensive legal expertise and stature among international jurists, contrasting it with Shapira’s relative inexperience.

Diamond suggested that Barak’s personal history, including surviving the Holocaust, added weight to his judicial opinions.

- “Israel’s” bold move -

Shapira has openly criticized the ICJ, claiming it lacks credibility among many “Israelis” and alleging biases in its decisions. His appointment signals a shift in “Israel’s” approach towards the ICJ’s ongoing case initiated by South Africa, reflecting a more confrontational stance.

“Israel’s” decision to nominate Shapira, who has been critical of the ICJ, indicates a reluctance to influence the court’s decisions, according to Diamond.

Shapira’s alignment with “Israeli” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s judicial reforms, aimed at increasing government influence over judicial appointments and decisions, further fueled domestic debate and protests against perceived threats to “Israeli” democracy.

In contrast, Barak’s retirement marked his opposition to Netanyahu’s reforms, earning him praise as a defender of democratic values despite criticism for his judicial decisions on Palestinian issues.

Barak’s legacy includes controversial rulings on matters like the separation wall and land expropriation in the West Bank.