South Africa Takes Israel to Top U.N Court
(15 January 2024) - The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the highest international judicial body, convened last week to consider South Africa’s case against Israel over claims of genocide. In an historic and unprecedented hearing, the Republic of South Africa’s legal team comprised of nine lawyers and advocates, alleged that the State of Israel committed acts and omissions of genocide against Palestine since the Hamas terrorist attack of October 7, 2023 where 1,200 civilians were killed and roughly 240 hostages were captured.
The conflict between Israel and Palestine has been ongoing and longstanding, claiming thousands of lives and displacing millions of people within the region. This conflict is highly complex and intricate, with its basis in geographical and regional history as well as ethnic and religious ties. As such, South Africa’s landmark quest for an injunction against Israel is one of great significance. South Africa’s involvement in this case has struck a central issue with its governing party, the African National Congress (ANC), who has compared Israel’s action in Gaza to Apartheid’s white-minority rule.
South Africa has claimed that Israel violated the United Nations’ Genocide Convention of 1948, arguing that its acts were "genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group". Both Israel and South Africa are signatories to this convention. As such, South Africa seeks preliminary orders to urge Israel to suspend military action in Gaza. The Israeli government has denied South Africa’s case of genocide, deeming the allegations as a “false and baseless” defense of Hamas.
Over 2 days, both South Africa and Israel provided their respective arguments before the court’s 15-judge panel. South Africa argued their five-point case stipulating Israel's actions as “genocidal in character”. Throughout their presentation, South Africa’s legal representation argued that Israel has engaged and continues to engage in the mass killings of Palestinians, inflicted bodily and mental harm, imposed conditions of a forced displacement and aid blockade, engaged in a military operation of destroying the Palestinian healthcare system as well as a prevention of Palestinian births by way of reproductive violence. South Africa has also claimed that Israel has failed to prevent these acts, a additional charge that contradicts the genocide convention. According to recent statistics from Gaza’s health ministry, over 23,000 civilians have been killed with more than 10,000 of those casualties being children. Currently, over 59,000 civilians have been injured in Gaza.
In their response, Israel’s five-person legal delegation argued its right to self-defence, citing South Africa’s alleged avoidance of the October 7th attack in their application. Israel’s lead defence lawyer Professor Malcolm Shaw quoted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, stating that Israel has “no intention of permanently occupying Gaza or displacing its civilian population” but rather is fighting with Hamas and not the Palestinian population. Professor Shaw refuted South Africa’s accusation of a dispute between Israel and Palestine, describing it rather as an “unispute”. Furthermore, Israel’s defence vehemently defended against claims of genocidal intent, stating that it was “taking steps to address the humanitarian situation in Gaza”. As such, the Israeli defence argued that the South African charge does not prove “irreparable harm and emergency” that would justify the urgency of preliminary orders of provisional measures. Currently, more than 120 Israeli hostages are believed to be held in Gaza. In Israel, over 1,000 civilians have been killed and over 8,000 civilians injured due to the conflict.
South Africa’s case has been welcomed by over 50 nations who include the 57-member bloc of the Organisation for Islamic Countries (OIC), Malaysia, Turkey, Colombia and Brazil. In opposition, nations such as the United States and Britain have deemed the proceedings as “a distraction”. In a statement made by South Africa Justice Minister Lamola, the South African legal team hopes to broaden their case beyond the current war citing the 76-year long conflict between Palestine and Israel. While it is believed that the court’s response related to the provision of emergency measures may occur within the following weeks, deliberations of the main case corresponding to claims of genocidal intent may take years.
GorStra Africa Desk will be following and reporting on the developments of this case.
Thilo Shumeulgen / Reuters | Edited by GorStra Team