At the International Court of Justice Israel accused South Africa

At the International Court of Justice, Israel accused South Africa of “distorting” the war in Gaza

In the first hearings at the International Court of Justice, Israel denied genocidal intent against Gaza and accused South Africa of “distorting” the war (Portal)

In a new hearing on the complaint filed by South Africa Before the International Court of Justice, Israel He again denied having one genocidal intent around Ribbon and, on the contrary, justified his actions as “inherent right to defend its citizens” after the massacres of Hamas on October 7th.

This might interest you: The Simon Wiesenthal Center rejected the allegations against Israel before the International Court of Justice

Tal Becker, who spoke to the judges in defense of the Jewish state during this Friday's three-hour meeting, regretted that Pretoria is trying to do this creating a “deeply distorted factual and legal picture” of what this war isas well as the imposition of Precautions This includes the “immediate cessation of military activities” in the Gaza Strip, which would only benefit the Palestinian militia.

The actions that led to the actions of the Defense Forces, to this land incursion that left more than 1,200 dead and 250 hostages, were “the largest mass murder calculated on one day since the Holocaust,” Becker added, emphasizing that “if there have been acts that can be described as genocide, then they have been committed against Israel since that Saturday” – mutilations, rapes and kidnappings of so many “Citizens like… could find terrorists” and as if that wasn’t enough, they also continued “burning people, including babies.”

Israel noted that the events of October 7 were the largest single-day mass murder since the Holocaust and therefore “if there have been acts that can be described as genocide, they were committed against Israel” (AP)

For this reason, he reflected, the “wholeness” of this case “depends on a manipulative, decontextualized and deliberately compiled description “the reality of the current hostilities” in the enclave, which does not reflect on its efforts to allow the entry of humanitarian aid to help Palestinian civilians caught in the crossfire.

You may be interested: Israel found weapons, grenades and games that incite hatred in a residence in the Gaza Strip

Finally, Becker acknowledged that while Hamas' actions, “as sadistic and systematic as they may be, do not relieve Israel of its obligation to respect the law,” they do not prevent the country from “taking legitimate measures to defend its citizens “.

At the same time, lawyer Christopher Staker considered South Africa's lawsuit seeking an end to the war “frankly, astonishing” and stated that “unilateral suspension of military operations by a single party to the conflict leaves the other party free to continue attacks.” “

The precautionary measures would prevent the safe return of the hostages, Israel noted (Europa Press)

The precautionary measures, he added, “will end attempts to rescue the hostages” and “will give Hamas space to maintain its capabilities.”which will result in it posing an even greater risk,” although he recalled, however, that the ICJ resolution “has limits” and cannot “require that a state refrain from exercising a plausible right of self-defense.”

You may be interested: Israel has discovered a tunnel in the southern Gaza Strip where Hamas was holding hostages

Accompanied by relatives of the victims and images of the massacres that occurred in his country in October, Staker responded to the samples presented by South Africa the day before, clarifying that they were “several individual incidents” and therefore “no There is evidence of this.” the intent of the entire military operation.”

Concluding the Jewish State's presentation, Pretoria Justice Minister Ronald Lamola said his counterpart had failed to “refute the compelling case” presented by his team, noting that he “admits that the statements” , which prove this “have not been refuted” of genocidal intent, but “surprisingly, it is said that they were made as rhetoric by people outside power and political leaders who neither explain nor condemn the soldiers' actions.”

He also regretted that Israel focused “largely” on the events of October 7 and not on the global scenario in Gaza, accusing it of including observations that are “neither supported by the facts nor by the situation on the ground.” .

South Africa believed Israel had failed to “refute the compelling arguments it put forward” (Portal)

“South Africa's case before this Court is simple: under the Genocide Convention, there is no justification for the acts of genocide currently being committed by Israel. Self-defense is not the answer to genocide. Nothing can ever justify genocide. “The ban is absolute,” he continued, concluding that “it does not matter what some Palestinians have done in Gaza or how great the threat might be to Israeli citizens.” “Genocidal attacks on the entire population of the “The creation of Gaza with the intention of destroying it cannot be justified.”

In a few weeks, when this hearing period is over, the judges of the International Court of Justice will have to decide on their assessment of the case and the need or lack of precautionary measures, depending on compliance with international humanitarian law.

(With information from EFE)