Israel will defend itself against South Africa’s claim that it is committing “genocidal” acts in Gaza.
Eylon Levy, spokesman for the Israeli government, told South African leaders that “history will judge you, and it will judge you without mercy” after Pretoria filed the case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague.
It is a “substantive, tightly argued” 84-page claim, which “only rarely strays from its chief necessary purpose of seeking to prove Israel’s genocidal intent”, wrote Patrick Wintour, diplomatic editor of The Guardian.
The filing and Israel’s decision to defend itself sets up a “high-stakes showdown before a panel of judges in the Great Hall of Justice” in the Dutch city, said The Associated Press. But with an estimated 22,400 people killed by Israel in the territory following the 7 October attacks by Hamas that killed 1,200 Israelis, can the case stop the war?
What the papers said
South Africa has requested that the ICJ declare “on an urgent basis that Israel is in breach of its obligations in terms of the Genocide Convention”, and that Israel should “immediately cease all acts and measures in breach of those obligations and take a number of related actions”.
The “genocidal actions” listed in the suit include “the killing of Palestinians in Gaza in large numbers, especially children; the destruction of their homes; their expulsion and displacement; as well as enforcing a blockade on food, water and medical assistance to the strip”, said Al Jazeera.
They also include “measures preventing Palestinian births by destroying essential health services crucial for the survival of pregnant women and babies”. Together, argues the claim, these measures are “intended to bring about their [Palestinians] destruction as a group”.
But although the court’s rulings are “intended to be binding”, analysis by an American lawyer found that that the ICJ’s measures have been respected in only 50% of cases, said Wintour. In the other 50%, including Ukraine v Russia in 2022 and the Gambia’s claims of genocide against Myanmar in 2020, the “losing state party simply defied the court”.
Nevertheless, said Al Jazeera, while any rulings by the ICJ may have “little bearing on the war itself”, a ruling in favour of South Africa and the Palestinians would “pile significant pressure on Israel’s number one backer and de facto weapons depot – the US government”.
But the White House has already condemned South Africa’s move, describing the allegations in the claim as “meritless”. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby called the submission “counterproductive and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever”, said The Independent.
The BBC added that while the ICJ does “not have the power to bring prosecutions”, its opinions “carry weight with the UN and other international legal bodies”.
What next?
Authorities in South Africa have confirmed that the ICJ has set an initial two-day hearing to begin on 11 January. “Our lawyers are currently preparing for this,” wrote Clayson Monyela, spokesperson for South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation, on social media.
Al Jazeera noted that proceedings “can take time – years, even” and pointed out that the court is “still deliberating on Gambia’s case against Myanmar from 2019”. The case will “probably drag on for years”, agreed the Los Angeles Times.
South Africa’s filing includes a request for the ICJ to urgently issue legally binding interim orders for Israel to “immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza”. These orders, known as provisional measures, would remain while the case progresses. An order in this case could be delivered within weeks.
But with Israel promising to fight the case “to dispel South Africa’s absurd blood libel”, there are no signs of either side backing down.
The claim is ‘tightly argued’ but ICJ’s rulings are often ignored
