As international legal organisations designate the United States as the focus country for the 2026 Day of the Endangered Lawyer, and Virginia federal judges move to replace improperly appointed prosecutors, the rule of law faces unprecedented pressure. Yet amid widespread calls for faster outcomes and streamlined processes, we're forgetting something crucial: the deliberate pace of legal processes isn't a bug in the system—it's actually a feature that protects us all.

Accusing Israel of special intent to destroy, when the state itself was the victim of attempted destruction, is ultimately perverse. The ICJ will consider, too, that the absence of special intent is strongly evidenced by Israel's specific actions in Gaza.

International law has always struggled with the crime of aggression. Theoretically, it stands as the gravest breach of international peace - the "supreme international crime" from which all others flow. In practice, however, it remains one of the most difficult offences to prosecute, hampered by narrow definitions, complex jurisdictional barriers, and explosive political sensitivities. Yet something is shifting. Across legislative chambers, university seminars, and advocacy networks, pressure is mounting to stretch the boundaries of aggression far beyond what its architects envisioned.