A legal precedent with Europe-wide implications could be set by the Dutch Supreme Court as it rules on a ban on F-35 parts exports to Israel. The case hinges on the court’s interpretation of the risk of complicity in war crimes, a standard that could be adopted elsewhere.
The lawsuit was initiated by human rights organizations that argue the evidence from Gaza establishes a “clear risk” that the parts are being used in violations of international law. This, they contend, legally obligates the Netherlands to stop the transfers.
An appeals court agreed, and its February 2024 decision to impose a ban was seen as a major victory for advocates of stricter arms control. The government’s appeal to the Supreme Court is an attempt to prevent this interpretation from becoming settled law.
The government argues that such risk assessments are inherently political and should be made by the executive, not the courts. It also warns that a rigid legal standard could paralyze foreign policy and damage international partnerships.
The Supreme Court’s final ruling on this matter will be closely analyzed by lawyers and policymakers across the continent. With similar court cases underway in France and Belgium, the Dutch decision could influence how other European judiciaries handle the contentious issue of arms sales to Israel.
