South Africa has asked the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) to open proceedings against Israel for alleged violations of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), calling on judges to take precautionary measures to prevent military operations in Gaza immediately suspended. Both countries are members of the convention, and South Africa hopes to show that Israel has taken measures to exterminate the Palestinian population that go beyond self-defense.
The TIJ has scheduled two hearings for this Thursday and Friday in The Hague, its official headquarters. The Israeli government has already called the lawsuit a “blood libel.” However, he plans to appoint a legal team to defend himself against the allegations. Precautionary measures are usually issued quickly and at this stage the judges only have to decide whether there is plausible evidence that a serious crime may have been committed. South Africa must prove that this is the case when it comes to the merits of a case that could drag on for several years. These are some key elements of the case against Benjamin Netanyahu's government.
Why can South Africa sue?
The Convention against Genocide obliges countries to prevent it and provides for the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, a UN court that decides disputes between states, in these cases. On December 29, South Africa claimed in its lawsuit that “Israel's actions and omissions (…) are genocidal in nature as they are committed with the specific intent (…) to destroy the Palestinians of Gaza as an integral part of the group.” national, racial and ethnic Palestinian”.
South Africa, which is seeking to adopt interim measures to protect Palestinians, hopes to show that the dispute concerns both its own obligations and those of Israel, which would fail to meet them. To this end, in its petition to the International Court of Justice, it includes the damage caused by the Israeli military offensive since October 7 last year, noting that “more than 21,110 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip.” [la cifra ha subido desde entonces a más de 23.300]including more than 7,729 minors [ahora más de 10.000]; more than 7,780 are missing; and more than 55,243 [en la actualidad, más de 59.000] wounded Palestinians.” It also says: “Israel has devastated large areas of the Gaza Strip and damaged or destroyed more than 355,000 Palestinian homes.”
Although the petition condemns the Hamas attacks that left 1,200 dead in Israel and the October 7 hostage crisis, it points out that “no armed attack against a state, no matter how serious, justifies violations of the Genocide Convention.”
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without restrictions.
Subscribe to
What more does South Africa ask of the TIJ?
In addition to ending Israeli military operations in Gaza, South Africa is calling for “the deprivation of access to adequate food and water” for the population. That Israel refrain from taking any action that could aggravate or widen the dispute and that it ensures that the people “under its control do not publicly and directly incite genocide.” If they do so, they must be held accountable in accordance with the Convention.
To illustrate this, numerous statements from Israeli politicians, senior officials and relevant figures are included. These include comments by Nissim Vaturi, a member of Likud, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's conservative party, who called for “wiping Gaza off the face of the earth” after the Hamas attack on October 7. Military officials are also quoted, such as General Ghassan Allian, who said of the Gazans and Hamas: “Human animals must be treated as such.” They wanted hell; They’re going to have hell.”
Are there precedents for similar lawsuits before the TIJ?
South Africa has followed Gambia's example in the case against Myanmar, two countries that are also members of the Genocide Convention. According to The Gambia, in 2016 the Myanmar army carried out “ethnic cleansing operations” against the Rohingya minority with the intention of exterminating them as a group. The Rohingya are a stateless, predominantly Muslim Indo-Aryan ethnic community living primarily in western Myanmar on the border with Bangladesh. The ICJ recognized Gambia as the “actual plaintiff” in the case.
For Cedric Ryngaert, professor of international law at Utrecht University: “South Africa wants to show that it can confront Israel, but every country that signs the convention is obliged to prevent genocide.” In a telephone conversation he recalls: “ Gambia received the support of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which in the case of Myanmar includes 56 countries.” “South Africa, a country in the Global South, acts alone; currently”. Another precedent is that of the Netherlands and Canada, which in 2023 filed “a lawsuit against Syria for torture before the International Court of Justice”.
Regarding the Syria case, Ryngaert explains: “Then it was alleged that the regime of Bashar al-Assad tortured thousands of civilians in violation of the UN Convention against Torture (1984), and we see that in this case there is already one There are patterns of action.” It’s another matter because his decisions put pressure on the countries.”
How does Israel react?
Israel has asserted its right to defend itself against the allegations and maintains that its military operations are in accordance with international law. Government spokesman Eylon Levy assured that unprecedented measures had been taken to reduce the number of civilian casualties. In a statement to British broadcaster Sky News on December 28, Levy said: “We are trying to focus on Hamas and that is why we are encouraging the evacuation of the population to the designated humanitarian zones.” Before South Africa's move, the Israeli executive had noted that the crimes committed by Hamas on October 7 could constitute genocide, “such as the killing of approximately 1,200 Israelis and foreign citizens, as well as the wounding, torture and mutilation of people.”
According to William Schabas, professor of international law at Britain's University of Middlesex, “Israel will argue that it is not committing genocide but is acting in self-defense and has that right.” “But the ICJ does not now have to decide whether genocide is underway . What the judges have to do is conclude whether there is a plausible argument that something could have been committed to take precautions,” he says on the phone.
“South Africa must prove that it committed genocide in due course,” emphasizes Schabas. Following the interim measures, which may take effect in a few weeks, the deadlines will become longer. South Africa must submit the case report. Israel will then likely challenge the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in a preliminary objection debate that does not involve the genocide itself. Then, as the case progresses, the matter can be assessed on its merits. The verdict could come within two or three years. Maybe more.
If Israel takes precautionary measures, will they comply?
Professor William Schabas responds: “It depends on what they ask of you.” South Africa calls on Israel to end its military activities in Gaza. If the judges order that, I suspect he won't do it.” Yes, it seems feasible that medicines, food, water will be allowed into the Gaza Strip… “Although it's also possible that they say that they already doing it. Or that they will from now on.” The implications of Israel’s possible refusal to comply with the International Court of Justice are clear. “Countries like Canada, the Netherlands and others that cooperate with Israel will be under pressure to limit their material or political assistance. “It will be very difficult for them because they have to comply with the TIJ order.”
His colleague Cedric Ryngaert shares this argument, “when the ICJ says that genocide may be being committed.” “By sending weapons, for example, they could be participating in genocide. Precautionary measures were called for and the content of the case is not addressed, but it would be a signal.” The expert concludes that genocide “can be punished under the concept of sedition, even if it was not committed; But proving genocidal intent is not easy.”
Follow all international information on Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits
_