South Africa recently launched a case before the United Nations International Court of Justice, accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. This is a first attempt of its kind at the Court regarding the current conflict. Israel quickly rejected the complaint, calling it “repugnant.”
South Africa’s submission to the International Court of Justice asserts that Israel’s “acts and omissions” are genocidal in nature, committed with the intention of “destroying Palestinians in Gaza” as part of the national group , Palestinian racial and ethnic.
South Africa is a strong critic of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Many South Africans, including President Cyril Ramaphosa, have compared Israel’s policies towards Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank with South Africa’s past apartheid regime. Israel rejects such accusations.
South Africa is asking the Hague Court to issue an interim order for Israel to immediately suspend its military operations in Gaza. A hearing on this request will likely take place in the coming days or weeks. If the case continues, it will take years, but an interim order could be issued in the coming weeks.
The Israeli government “with repugnance” rejected accusations of genocide, calling them “bloody libel.” In a Foreign Ministry statement, Israel says South Africa’s case lacks legal merit and constitutes a “despicable and contemptuous exploitation” of the Court. Israel also accuses South Africa of cooperating with Hamas, the Palestinian militant group behind the deadly Oct. 7 attack in southern Israel that sparked the ongoing war.
Israel also says it acts in accordance with international law and focuses its military actions only against Hamas, adding that Gaza residents are not enemies. Israel says it is taking measures to minimize harm to civilians and allow humanitarian aid into the territory.
South Africa can bring the case to the Court for genocide under the Genocide Convention because both countries are signatories to it.
It remains to be seen whether the deal will succeed in ending the war. Although the Court’s decisions are legally binding, they are not always followed. In March 2022, the Court ordered Russia to end hostilities in Ukraine, a legally binding decision that Moscow has ignored by continuing its attacks.
South Africa’s foreign ministry said in a statement that the country was “gravely concerned about the plight of civilians caught up in ongoing Israeli attacks in the Gaza Strip due to the indiscriminate use of force and forced displacement of residents”.
The ministry added that there were “continuing reports of international crimes, such as crimes against humanity and war crimes, being committed, as well as reports of acts reaching the threshold of genocide or related crimes as defined in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, which have been and may still be committed in the context of the ongoing massacres in Gaza.
The South African president has previously accused Israel of war crimes and acts “amounting to genocide.” South Africa has also pushed the International Criminal Court, also based in The Hague, to investigate Israel’s actions in Gaza.
The ICC prosecutes individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, while the International Court of Justice resolves disputes between nations.
In the West Bank, the Palestinian Foreign Ministry welcomed South Africa’s accusations against Israel. In a statement on social media, he urged the Court to “immediately take action to protect the Palestinian people and call on Israel, as the occupying power, to end its assault on the Palestinian people.”
Balkees Jarrah, deputy international justice director at Human Rights Watch, said the South Africa case “provides an important opportunity for the International Court of Justice to examine Israel’s actions in Gaza using the Genocide Convention of 1948. She said South Africa calls on the highest judicial body of the United Nations to provide clear and definitive answers to the question of whether Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people.
Jarrah stressed that the case before the International Court of Justice “is not a criminal case against individual alleged perpetrators and does not concern the International Criminal Court (ICC), a separate body. But the ICJ case should “also generate increased international support for impartial justice at the ICC and other credible fora.”
Written by [Your name]