The central question before the Dutch Supreme Court is whether there is a “clear risk” that F-35 parts shipped from the Netherlands are being used to commit war crimes in Gaza. A ruling on this issue will decide the fate of a government appeal against a ban on the exports to Israel.
The case was initiated by three human rights groups that presented evidence to argue that such a risk not only exists but is undeniable. They claim that Dutch and international law obligates the government to halt the shipments immediately to avoid complicity in violations of humanitarian law.
This argument was validated by an appeals court in February 2024, which explicitly cited the “clear risk” of violations as the reason for imposing a ban on the F-35 parts. That ruling overturned a lower court’s decision and set a high bar for the government to clear in its appeal to the Supreme Court.
The government, however, disputes the court’s role in making such an assessment. It argues that determining risks associated with foreign policy is a complex political calculation that belongs to the executive, not the judiciary. It also maintains that a Dutch ban would not materially affect Israel’s military capabilities, as the U.S. would ensure supply.
The backdrop to this legal debate is the grim reality of the war, which followed the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel. The conflict has led to tens of thousands of deaths in Gaza and has prompted a wave of international scrutiny over arms sales to Israel, with several European nations taking steps to restrict or halt them.