Colombia has formally withdrawn its intervention in the South Africa v. Israel genocide case at the International Court of Justice. The decision, communicated to the tribunal on September 18, 2026, and confirmed on September 22, marks a sharp diplomatic pivot under President Abelardo de la Espriella toward restoring bilateral ties with Israel.
The Court Filing and Constitutional Authority
The International Court of Justice confirmed that Colombia informed the court on Friday, September 18, 2026, that it was withdrawing its declaration of intervention. The original declaration had been deposited under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court on April 5, 2024, during the administration of former President Gustavo Petro.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs explained that the determination was adopted in the framework of the constitutional attribution of the President of the Republic to direct international relations, as set out in numeral 2 of Article 189 of the Political Constitution. Officials emphasized that withdrawing the declaration does not alter Colombia’s status as a state party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, nor does it affect the binding force of those international obligations.
Intervention under Article 63 allows a state that is party to a multilateral treaty to present its interpretation of the convention’s provisions without becoming a main party to the litigation. Colombia was never a claimant in the underlying lawsuit, which was initiated by South Africa against Israel in late December 2023 over military operations in the Gaza Strip. The main proceedings before the United Nations tribunal continue regardless of Bogotá’s departure from the intervention docket.
Diplomatic Rapprochement With Israel and Regional Security
The withdrawal aligns with a broader diplomatic reset between Bogotá and Tel Aviv. Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Gideon Sa’ar publicly welcomed the move, pointing to discussions held in Washington between Israeli officials and Colombian Foreign Minister Omar Bula.
Gideon Sa’ar, Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, via Eltiempo, thanked his friends, including the president of Colombia, Abelardo De La Espriella, for Colombia’s official announcement that it was withdrawing its membership in South Africa’s false and malicious lawsuit against Israel at the ICJ, which had been filed during Petro’s antisemitic era, adding that this came in the wake of his conversation in July with his colleague Omar Bula in Washington.
Beyond the legal filing at the Hague, the renewed bilateral relationship has yielded immediate policy adjustments. The countries have moved to restore diplomatic channels, eliminate tourist visa requirements, and revive commercial agreements such as Colombian coal exports to Israel. Under President de la Espriella, foreign policy has pivoted toward Washington—following backing from United States President Donald Trump—and toward security cooperation with Tel Aviv, while distancing Bogotá from governments in Cuba and Nicaragua.
Concurrently, the new administration has pursued regional security partnerships. During an official visit to Barranquilla, Costa Rican President Laura Fernández met with President de la Espriella to strengthen joint efforts against transnational drug trafficking and organized crime networks.
Domestic Political Fallout and Criticism
The reversal drew condemnation from political opponents within Colombia. Former President Gustavo Petro, whose administration originally lodged the 2024 intervention to support South Africa’s genocide allegations against Israeli military actions, took to social media to denounce the current government’s decision.
Gustavo Petro, former President of Colombia, via Chicagotribune
Petro added in his public critique that the policy shift moved the country from a leading voice in attacking a genocide to an accomplice. Despite the domestic polarization surrounding the Gaza litigation, the current administration maintains that its constitutional prerogative over foreign affairs permits a realignment of diplomatic priorities at the UN tribunal.