The present study examines the interactional metadiscourse markers employed in the oral argument presented by Yasmine Moussa, Legal Advisor in the office of Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs, before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning Israeli policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territories. Using Hyland's (2005a) model of interactional metadiscourse markers, it also examines the frequency of occurrence of the interactional metadiscourse markers used in the data as well as their functions. Results reveal that the two categories of interactional metadiscourse markers provided by Hyland (2005a), namely stance and engagement, are employed in the data as well as the four subcategories of stance markers. These are: hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mention. Of the five subcategories of engagement markers, only four have been found in the data. These are: directives, questions, shared knowledge, and personal asides. The data also reveals that stance markers outnumber engagement markers, and that attitude markers are the most frequently occurring stance markers whereas the most frequently occurring engagement marker is shared knowledge. All the interactional metadiscourse markers used in the data serve to persuade members of the ICJ to issue a ruling to make Israel end its occupation of Palestinian territories.