In a significant development, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to hold public hearings on South Africa’s genocide case against Israel. The two-day hearings, beginning on Thursday, have raised hopes among pro-Palestine campaigners that the World Court might intervene and put an end to Israel’s devastating military campaign in Gaza. This case, filed by South Africa, marks the first time the ICJ will address the siege on the Gaza Strip, where thousands of people, including children, have lost their lives. South Africa accuses Israel of committing genocide, a claim denied by Israel.
South Africa’s application, submitted on December 29, alleges that Israel’s actions in Gaza, such as the killing of civilians, mass displacement of Palestinians, and destruction of their homes, constitute genocide and demonstrate intent. The suit also highlights the blockade on food and the destruction of essential health services, which South Africa argues are intended to bring about the destruction of Palestinians as a group. With more than 85 percent of Gaza’s population displaced and aid agencies warning of a famine risk, the urgency of the situation cannot be ignored.
While Israel has promised to defend itself against these allegations, the ICJ will now determine whether it has jurisdiction over the case. The ICJ’s decision will be crucial, as it can order interim measures to halt ongoing violations even before the case proper starts. However, the unique nature of this case, with Hamas not being a party to the suit, presents a challenge for the court. Professor Michael Becker of Trinity College of Dublin suggests that the court might ask Israel to show more restraint rather than ceasing its actions.
It is important to note that a full judgment from the ICJ on whether Israel has committed genocide in Gaza could take years to emerge. The ICJ, composed of 15 judges appointed for nine-year terms, aims to maintain impartiality and independence. However, past voting patterns of judges aligned with their countries’ politics have raised concerns. Nevertheless, the appointment of ad hoc judges from Israel and South Africa will ensure fair representation.
The preliminary hearings this week will determine the ICJ’s jurisdiction in the case. South Africa and Israel, as parties to the Genocide Convention, are subject to the ICJ’s interpretations of the convention. The two teams of legal experts will present their arguments to the full bench of judges, who will later vote and announce a final decision. While ICJ judgments are legally binding, enforcement power is limited, posing potential challenges for South Africa.
The international implications of this case cannot be overlooked. The ICJ’s decision, regardless of its outcome, could increase international pressure on Israel to halt its actions in Gaza. Moreover, countries and organizations can show support through political statements rather than legally intervening, which could complicate the process. Notably, Malaysia, Turkey, Bolivia, and others have expressed support for South Africa, while the US has defended Israel.
As the ICJ hearings unfold, the world watches closely, hoping for a just resolution that brings an end to the suffering in Gaza. The significance of this case extends beyond the courtroom, as it has the potential to set important precedents and hold parties accountable for their actions.
