Ynet News (English), on Gaza, 5 November 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

: Meet the newly elected judges at The Hague and their ties to Israel

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.4 findings

The UN General Assembly and Security Council elected five judges to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague on Tuesday: Dapo Akande of the United Kingdom, François Alabrune of France, Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud of Jordan, Phoebe Okowa of Kenya and Rena Lee of Singapore. Their nine-year terms will begin in 2027 and end in 2036. Israel's ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, expressed concern over the election of some of the judges, citing their previous involvement in proceedings against Israel.

Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud: A sitting judge at the International Court of Justice since May 2025 and a former Jordanian ambassador to the UN. He previously served as legal adviser to Jordan's Foreign Ministry and as a member of the UN International Law Commission, which he chaired in 2021. on Jordan's behalf in proceedings before the International Court of Justice, including the 2004 advisory opinion on Israel's West Bank separation barrier and the 2024 advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israeli policies and practices in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

On October 30, 2023, less than a month after the October 7 terrorist attack, Hmoud accused Israel of "ethnic cleansing" and "war crimes" during a UN Security Council meeting. Dapo Akande: A professor of international law at the University of Oxford and a member of the UN International Law Commission (ILC). Throughout his career, he has represented and advised countries in international legal proceedings, including before the International Court of Justice.

Among other roles, he served as legal counsel for Japan in proceedings concerning the legal consequences of Israeli activities in the West Bank. François Alabrune: A senior diplomat and legal expert who serves as France's ambassador to the Netherlands and its permanent representative to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. He previously served as legal adviser to the French Foreign Ministry and represented France in proceedings before international courts.

Among other cases, he served as France's legal representative in proceedings involving the Genocide Convention, including cases brought by Ukraine against Russia and The Gambia against Myanmar. Rena Lee: Singapore's ambassador for international law, with experience in maritime law, international arbitration and multilateral negotiations. From 2018 to 2023, she chaired the UN conference that negotiated the international agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

She previously served as chief executive of the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and as a senior legal adviser in the country's Attorney-General's Chambers. Phoebe N. Okowa: A sitting judge at the International Court of Justice since November 2025, who has now been elected to a full nine-year term. She is a professor of international law at Queen Mary University of London and previously served as a member of the UN International Law Commission.

Throughout her career, she has represented and advised countries in proceedings before the International Court of Justice. Among other roles, she served as legal counsel for Namibia in proceedings that led to the court's 2024 advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israeli policies and practices in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. She has also worked on international legal proceedings involving climate change and human rights.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

Ynet three times cites the judges' work in the 2024 advisory opinion on Israel's policies in the West Bank as a mark against them, but never says what the court decided: that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem is unlawful and the settlements illegal. The Times of Israel reported the ruling in its coverage of the same election. Without it a reader takes the proceedings as a partisan attack on Israel rather than a case the court itself decided against Israel's position.

How we know

Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the UN, criticized the election of the judges: "Their résumés are troubling and raise questions. Will a judge who, a month after the October 7 massacre, be able to handle the case against it impartially? Will a judge who served as legal counsel in a case against us administer justice professionally and without bias? The election in the General Assembly is yet another example of the UN's inherent bias against the State of Israel."

The International Court of Justice, based in The Hague, is the principal judicial organ of the UN. It is authorized to hear legal disputes between states and issue advisory opinions on questions of international law referred to it by authorized UN bodies. The court consists of 15 judges, elected to nine-year terms through separate votes in the UN General Assembly and Security Council. In December 2023, South Africa initiated proceedings against Israel at the ICJ, alleging violations of the Genocide Convention in the Gaza Strip.

The court issued provisional measures in 2024, and the case remains ongoing.

Read the original article on ynetnews.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (4)

Ynet profiles the five newly elected ICJ judges through the lens of Israel's UN ambassador, and lets Danny Danon's claim that one judge "wrongly declared that Israel was committing genocide" stand unchallenged, though the article's own reporting says Hmoud spoke of "ethnic cleansing" and "war crimes". It never tells the reader that the 2024 advisory opinion the judges worked on found the occupation unlawful, or that a UN Commission of Inquiry has found Israel committed genocide in Gaza. Its headline puts Danon's verdict in quotation marks without naming him.

  1. Gives a contested claim the last word

    Serious

    “wrongly declared that Israel was committing genocide”

    Why this matters
    Ynet ends its reporting with Danon's claim that a judge "wrongly declared that Israel was committing genocide" and sets nothing against it.
    The impression it gives
    That Hmoud declared a genocide in October 2023 and that any such declaration has been shown to be wrong.
    The context
    Ynet's own sentence S7 records Hmoud's words as "ethnic cleansing" and "war crimes", not genocide, and Danon's own post as reported by the Times of Israel speaks of war crimes. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry found in September 2025 that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, so the word "wrongly" is contradicted by the documented record. The article corrects neither point.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Danon said the judge had "wrongly declared that Israel was committing genocide"; Hmoud's recorded words at the October 2023 Security Council meeting were "ethnic cleansing" and "war crimes", and a UN Commission of Inquiry found in September 2025 that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.

  2. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “He took an adversarial position toward Israel”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice Ynet calls Hmoud's submissions for Jordan in two advisory opinion proceedings an "adversarial position toward Israel".
    The impression it gives
    That Hmoud acted as Israel's opponent in a dispute, which supports Danon's charge of bias.
    The context
    Advisory opinions answer questions of international law referred by UN bodies, as the article itself explains; states submitting views are not parties litigating against Israel. The word carries Danon's verdict into the outlet's voice.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“issue advisory opinions on questions of international law referred to it by authorized UN bodies”

    Show it in the article

  3. Headline goes beyond the article

    Minor

    “‘Troubling résumés’”

    Why this matters
    The headline puts Danon's judgement in quotation marks with no name attached.
    The impression it gives
    That the judges' records are troubling as a general assessment, not one party's complaint.
    The context
    The phrase comes from Israel's ambassador to the UN, who the body names as the source of the criticism; the headline drops that attribution.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Their résumés are troubling and raise questions”

    Show it in the article

  4. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    Ynet three times cites the judges' work in the 2024 advisory opinion on Israel's policies in the West Bank as a mark against them, but never says what the court decided: that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem is unlawful and the settlements illegal. The Times of Israel reported the ruling in its coverage of the same election. Without it a reader takes the proceedings as a partisan attack on Israel rather than a case the court itself decided against Israel's position.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Ynet News (English)

  1. 6 NovPalestinians push anti-Israel UN resolutions as EU struggles to agree8.7
  2. 5 NovTony Blair meets Herzog in Israel as US pushes to revive stalled Gaza reconstruction plan6.0
  3. 4 NovOctober 7: New details reveal five red-hot Hamas warnings Israel missed0.0
  4. 2 Nov'Inside, I was still at war': Nova survivor's descent into addiction and road to recovery0.0
  5. 2 NovTrump's Gaza plan stalls as Israel's political deadlock deepens8.7

Everything we scored from Ynet News (English)