It's waiting for it Morning, Friday January 26, the ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on possible precautionary measures to be taken against Israel in connection with South Africa's appeal against the Jewish state for the crime of genocide. South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor will also be present at the hearing in The Hague.
According to observers, the IGC could adopt a number of measures, including calling for a halt to the military operation in the Gaza Strip. Its decision is binding and non-appealable, but it is not certain whether Israel will decide to respect it since the court does not have the tools to enforce its rulings. On Friday, the court will not rule on the main question of the appeal (which will take years), namely whether Israel committed genocide in the Palestinian enclave.
Israel's position
“The war was forced on us by Hamas. Hamas terrorists broke into Israel and committed terrible acts. The attackers proudly displayed their barbarism. “Any action taken by Israel is justified to ensure the safety of civilians after the October 7 attacks,” he said. Tal Becker, the legal adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, emphasized at the opening of the second day of negotiations at the International Court of Justice that the signatories The lawsuit “provided a manipulative picture of the events and incorrectly used the term 'genocide,' which constitutes an emptying of the content.”
Calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip would mean encouraging “Hamas” and other terrorist groups and denying Israel the right to defend itself, Israel's legal team told the court, rejecting the allegations. These are allegations that are denied by humanitarian aid and are based on a “distorted” image of Israeli government statements. This is even more true since it is Hamas that wants the genocide of the Israelis.
The ceasefire call would therefore aim to protect Hamas from Israel's response to the October 7 atrocities. Lawyer Gilad Nolan said in his closing statements that acceptance of the ruling would “a signal to terrorist groups that they can commit war crimes and crimes against humanity and then seek the protection of the Court themselves.” In this way, the Court's efforts to prosecute genocides would be “weakened” and “turned into a weapon in the hands of terrorists who have no respect for humanity and international law.”
Regarding the allegations of wanting genocide against the Palestinian population, the legal team stressed that this contradicts Israel's various measures to reduce the number of civilian casualties and enable the distribution of humanitarian aid. If genocide had been the goal, “would Israel have postponed ground operations for weeks, invested significant resources in telling civilians where, when and how to leave combat zones, and maintained a dedicated staff of experts whose only job is to send aid?” asked Galit Raguan, a senior official in Israel's Justice Ministry.
The South African accusation
The appeal filed by South Africa asks the court to determine whether Israel's conduct constitutes a violation of the Convention Against Genocide, to which both Tel Aviv and Pretoria are party. Specifically, the South African state accuses Israel not only of committing acts of genocide, but also of failing to prevent and suppress acts of genocide attributable to its troops. In fact, the convention prohibits states from committing genocide, but also provides for their obligation to prevent and suppress the individual acts in question.
The precedents of what the court deals with
It is not the first time that the ICJ has been asked to rule on allegations of genocide. Ukraine sued Russia for this crime after the invasion in 2022. But in this case, the lawsuit concerned the two countries directly involved in the war, while South Africa is a third party in the dispute between Israel and Hamas. In this case, too, there is a precedent. In 2019, Gambia filed a complaint against Myanmar over alleged acts of genocide against the Rohingya people. As for the reason that led South Africa to engage in this process, it should be borne in mind that the ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), has historically supported the PLO and has long associated Israel's treatment of the Palestinians with that of the Black South Africans have compared apartheid.
Founded in 1945, the Court, which usually deals with border and sovereignty issues, is the highest judicial body of the United Nations and decides on disputes between states: it is therefore not concerned with the determination of individual crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court fall to the Court of Justice (ICC). ) and with which it should not be confused, although both are based in The Hague.
also read