The inviolability of the United Nations in armed conflicts: International Humanitarian Law and the ICJ’s UNRWA Advisory Opinion

Attacks against United Nations premises and personnel during the hostilities in Gaza since 2023 have renewed attention to the legal protection afforded to the Organization in situations of armed conflict. These incidents raise the question whether damage to United Nations facilities constitutes merely a breach of the Organization’s inviolability or whether it must also be characterised as a violation of international humanitarian law. This article examines the relationship between the regime governing the inviolability of the United Nations and the rules of international humanitarian law, with particular attention to the 2025 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of Israel in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations and other international organizations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The article argues that, although United Nations premises and personnel may benefit from protection under both regimes, the rules governing the inviolability of international organizations remain conceptually and legally autonomous from international humanitarian law and continue to apply during armed conflict. Rather than being displaced through the application of lex specialis principle, the two regimes operate concurrently and may provide cumulative protection. The article further contends that the reasoning of the Court in the advisory opinion supports this interpretation by grounding the privileges and immunities of the United Nations in the functional necessities of the Organization under the Charter and the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. Consequently, attacks against United Nations premises may engage separate and cumulative sources of international responsibility under both regimes without merging them into a single legal framework.