Today marks a significant moment in international law. South Africa’s genocide case against Israel has begun with public hearings on 11 and 12 January at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague.
It centres on allegations of genocide by the Zionist occupation against the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, which is harrowingly described by one expert as,
“…the largest concentration camp in the world,”
…in which the Zionist state has killed over 23,000 people — predominantly civilians — since 7 October 2023. [1] [2]
Historic legal action against last remaining apartheid regime
South Africa’s accusation is based on the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, to which both nations are signatories.
The Convention obliges countries to prevent and punish acts of genocide. South Africa’s claim focuses on the large-scale killing of civilians, particularly children, the mass expulsion and displacement of Palestinians, and the destruction of homes.
Additionally, it highlights inciting statements by Israeli officials and measures such as the blockade on food and the destruction of essential health services.
Israel’s response prior to the case
Israel has come under criticism for a response described as hysterical, accusing South Africa of “playing advocate for the Devil”, and saying it openly aligned itself with “the Hamas rapist [sic] regime”. [3]
The state has vowed to defend itself. [3]
What exactly is the ICJ?
This case is distinct from other ongoing cases at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which tries individuals for criminal offences. The ICJ settles legal disputes between states.
Indeed, the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC has opened a digital platform for people to submit complaints online, particularly Palestinians, which can be found here. [4] [5]
The ICJ is the United Nations’ highest body, and it comprises of 15 judges from the US, Russia, Slovakia, France, Morocco, Somalia, China, Uganda, India, Jamaica, Lebanon, Japan, Germany, Australia, and Brazil. [6]
For this case, Israel and South Africa have appointed one “ad hoc” judge each, making the total 17 judges.
What happens now?
The initial hearings will determine the ICJ’s jurisdiction, which is typically established when the involved states acknowledge the court’s authority or are party to a relevant treaty.
South Africa and Israel, as parties to the Genocide Convention, are subject to the ICJ interpretations of such a treaty or treaties.
In the courtroom, countries will appoint teams of legal experts and law professors to argue their cases. Israel’s team includes the British lawyer Malcolm Shaw, while John Dugard, an international law professor, will lead South Africa’s team.
The hearing on 11 January will focus on South Africa’s request for interim measures, urging the ICJ to order the Israeli military out of Gaza and to cease and desist its genocidal attacks.
How long could it take?
If the trial is to run its full course, it is likely to take years.
However, an expedited decision is possible, as an interim measure which aims to halt Israel’s relentless bombing and siege of Gaza could be taken within weeks.
Such a swift step was seen in the Ukraine vs. Russia case, where the ICJ ordered Russia to suspend military operations in less than three weeks. [7]
The final judgment, determining Israel’s alleged genocide in Gaza, could take years, as demonstrated by a similar ongoing case opened by The Gambia against Myanmar for the latter’s persecution of the Rohingya Muslims. [8]
Main limiting factor
If the majority finds Israel in violation of international law, the ICJ decision would be legally binding; but the Zionist occupation is no stranger to being on the wrong side of international law.
The problem for the international community is that the court lacks enforcement power.
In the routine event of non-compliance of international law by Israel, South Africa could approach the UN Security Council for enforcement. However, the problem there is the fact that some states have veto power to shield themselves (and their allies).
As Al Jazeera counts,
“Since 1945, the US has vetoed 34 out of 36 UNSC draft resolutions related to the Israel-Palestine conflict.” [9]
Fight is more important than outcome
As a result, the case could be more useful in other ways, such as putting more and more international pressure on Israel in other ways.
This is why the Director of Washington-based Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, Mai El-Sadany, has said,
“It’s important to think less about the judgement issued by the ICJ and more about the process itself.
“[It] can have significant impacts for accountability in a different form, whether documenting the experiences of victims, naming and shaming perpetrators, or setting an international precedent.” [10]
Global attention
The case has already attracted global attention, with several countries including Malaysia, Turkey, Jordan, Bolivia, the Maldives, Namibia, and Pakistan, expressing support for South Africa.
Conversely, the United States has opposed the case, with National Security Council Co-ordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby criticising it as “meritless” and “counterproductive.” [11]
The outcome of this high-profile case could set a precedent in international law and significantly impact the ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip.
Your duty
The lawyer Mohammed Akunjee has written detailed instructions on how to contact the judges to express your concern, along with a template email.
The process can be done in a few minutes so we encourage people to avail this opportunity.
Watch the proceedings
Also read
Source: Islam21c
Notes
[1] https://theintercept.com/2018/05/20/norman-finkelstein-gaza-iran-israel-jerusalem-embassy/
[2] https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/gaza-death-toll-from-israeli-onslaught-exceeds-23-000/3103337
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Y12La20Rs
[5] https://www.justiceforall.org/icc-submissions/#download
