Last week, South Africa became the first country to file a lawsuit against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, increasing international pressure on Tel Aviv to stop the deadly and relentless bombardment of the Gaza Strip on October 7, 2023, which left more than 22,000 civilians dead , including many children.
The 84-page statement of claim, which South Africa filed with the court on December 29, states: details Recalls that brutality is being committed in Gaza and calls on the Court of Justice – the United Nations body for the settlement of interstate disputes – to urgently declare that Israel has breached its responsibilities under international law since October 7.
The move is the latest in a long list of actions Pretoria has taken since the start of the war on Gaza, including loudly and persistently condemning Israeli attacks on Gaza and the West Bank, recalling South Africa's ambassador to Israel and referencing the Suffering of Palestinians before the International Criminal Court (ICC) and call for an extraordinary meeting of the BRICS countries to discuss the conflict. The ICC takes cases of alleged crimes committed by individuals, not states.
Here is a breakdown of the ICJ case:
What allegations does South Africa make against Israel?
South Africa has accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, in violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention, which defines genocide as “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.” “.
The genocidal actions listed in the lawsuit include the killing of large numbers of Palestinians in Gaza, particularly children; the destruction of their homes; their expulsion and displacement; A blockade of food, water and medical supplies to the strip was also imposed.
This includes introducing measures to prevent Palestinian births by destroying essential health services that are crucial to the survival of pregnant women and babies.
All of these actions, the lawsuit states, “are intended to achieve their objectives.” [Palestinians] Destruction as a group”.
Pretoria also accuses Israel of failing to prevent and prosecute incitement to genocide, citing in particular statements made by Israeli officials during the war that attempted to justify the killings and destruction in Gaza.
South Africa has also specifically asked the International Court of Justice to take urgent action to prevent Israel from committing further crimes in the strip – probably by ordering Tel Aviv to stop its invasion. This request will be given priority, the ICJ said in a statement, but did not give a timetable.
Documenting South Africa is particularly necessary given the increasing disinformation surrounding the war and for other far-reaching purposes, said Mai El-Sadany, human rights lawyer and director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy.
“The trial is important to slow the normalization of all mass atrocities committed by Israel; They send the message that a country that commits mass atrocities, as Israel does, can expect to be brought before an international court, that its record will be criticized in relation to international norms, and that its reputation on the international stage will be tarnished takes,” she said.
Members of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign protest in front of the Israeli Consulate in Cape Town, South Africa, October 11, 2023 [Nic Bothma/Reuters]
What evidence did South Africa provide?
South Africa claims that statements by Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, demonstrated “genocidal intent.”
For example, the lawsuit cites Netanyahu's comparison of the Palestinians to the Amalek, a biblical nation that God commanded the Israelites to destroy. The Bible verse says, “Go now and strike Amalek…kill man and woman, child.”
Furthermore, Netanyahu said in his December 26 statement that despite the widespread destruction of Gaza and the killing of thousands, “we are intensifying the fighting in the coming days, and this will be a long fight.”
The lawsuit also cited several other statements, including those in which Israeli officials portrayed the people of Gaza as a force of “darkness” and Israel as a force of “light.”
South Africa adds that “the scale of the Israeli military’s operations – its indiscriminate bombings and executions of civilians, as well as Israel’s blockade of food, water, medicine, fuel, shelter and other humanitarian assistance” is evidence of its claims. These actions have brought the Strip to the “brink of famine,” the lawsuit says.
In addition to genocide, South Africa claims that Israel is committing other violations of international law in the Gaza Strip, including an assault on Palestinian culture by attacking places of “religion, education, art, science, historical monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and sick life”. Wounded people are being collected.”
Have similar cases already been filed?
Yes. Under the Genocide Convention, nation states can bring charges of genocide against other countries, whether or not they are directly involved in the conflict. In 2019, Gambia filed a lawsuit with the court on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation against Myanmar over its atrocities against the Rohingya people.
Israel and South Africa are both parties to the International Court of Justice, meaning its decisions are binding on both. But although the ICJ has more weight than the UN Security Council, where Israel is closely protected by the US, the court lacks enforcement powers. In fact, the ICJ's orders have been ignored in some cases without serious consequences.
For example, in March 2022, a month after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Kiev filed a lawsuit against Russia with the Court of Justice. In this case, Ukraine also called on the International Court of Justice to determine emergency measures to end Russian aggression.
The court effectively ordered Moscow to halt military operations shortly thereafter, saying it was “deeply concerned” about the attack on Ukraine. Yet the war in Europe continues more than a year later.
What happens next?
South African authorities confirmed on Tuesday that the International Court of Justice has scheduled a hearing for January 11-12. “Our lawyers are currently preparing,” wrote Clayson Monyela, spokesman for South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation, on X, formerly Twitter.
Just to be clear. The ICJ has scheduled a hearing on this case #South Africa triggered. This is for the 11th-12th. Set in The Hague in January 2024. Our lawyers are currently preparing for this. https://t.co/Cx1YceIYFM
— Clayson Monyela (@ClaysonMonyela) January 2, 2024
But procedures can take time, even years. For example, the court is still deliberating the 2019 Gambia v. Myanmar case. There were evidentiary hearings in that case – most recently in October 2023, when the court asked Gambia to respond to Myanmar's counterarguments.
South Africa proactively requested an expedited process in its December application. His call for an emergency order from the International Court of Justice could lead to relatively quick results within a few weeks, as was the case with Ukraine.
In response to the lawsuit, Israel's Foreign Ministry vehemently rejected the allegations of genocide, calling the Pretoria case a “blood libel” and a “despicable and contemptible exploitation” of the court. In a statement from the ministry, South Africa was also accused of “criminal complicity” in Hamas attacks.
On Tuesday, spokesman Eylon Levy confirmed that Tel Aviv would defend itself at the hearings in The Hague. “We assure the leaders of South Africa that history will judge you, and without mercy,” Levy told reporters.
Sarang Shidore, director of the Washington-based Quincy Institute, a think tank, said this stance could mean that Tel Aviv sees the complaint as a serious challenge to its policies in Gaza.
Although ICJ rulings may have little impact on the war itself, a ruling in favor of South Africa and the Palestinians would put significant pressure on Israel's largest supporter and de facto arms repository – the US government.
“The Biden administration is increasingly vulnerable to domestic war opponents and international accusations of double standards,” Shidore said, alluding to the stark difference between the U.S. stance on the Russia-Ukraine war and its position on the Gaza war. However, a ruling against Israel “could have an impact on the reputation of the United States,” he said.
“It is my impression that the Biden administration and some key European allies will strongly support Israel at the International Court of Justice,” Shidore added. “But we will see exactly how that support is formulated.”