South Africa has formally filed a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing the nation of committing crimes of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The case comes after nearly three months of relentless Israeli bombardment that has claimed the lives of more than 21,500 people and caused widespread destruction in the besieged enclave.
In an application submitted to the ICJ on Friday, South Africa characterized Israel's actions in Gaza as "genocidal in character," alleging that they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial, and ethnic group. The application accuses Israel of killing Palestinians in Gaza, causing them serious bodily and mental harm, and inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa drew a parallel between Israel's policies in Gaza and the occupied West Bank with his country's past apartheid regime, highlighting similarities with the racial segregation imposed by the white-minority rule that ended in 1994. This comparison adds a historical context to South Africa's stance on the matter.
Several human rights organizations have previously asserted that Israeli policies towards Palestinians amount to apartheid, further fuelling the contentious nature of the allegations. The move by South Africa seeks international accountability for these actions.
While any case at the ICJ is expected to take years to resolve, South Africa has urgently called for the court to convene in the next few days to issue "provisional measures" aimed at calling for a ceasefire. The request for provisional measures is a legal step to protect against further harm to the rights of the Palestinian people under the Genocide Convention.
Article IX of the Genocide Convention allows any state party to bring a case against another to the ICJ, even without direct involvement in the conflict. The court's previous rulings in cases like the one between the Gambia and Myanmar demonstrate its authority to address such matters.
Legal experts suggest that proving genocidal intent can be challenging, but South Africa points to statements made by Israeli officials as evidence. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant's reference to Palestinians in Gaza as "human animals" and Israeli Army Major General Ghassan Alian's statement about bringing "hell" to Gaza are cited as examples supporting the claim of genocidal intent.
While the ICJ's provisional measures are legally binding, enforcement remains a challenge. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is already investigating possible war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by both Hamas and Israel, focusing on individual accountability. In contrast, the ICJ serves as an arena for adjudicating conflicts between states.
Israel has swiftly rejected South Africa's case, with the spokesperson for Israel's foreign ministry calling it a "blood libel" lacking both factual and legal basis. The rejection emphasizes that South Africa is cooperating with Hamas, which Israel designates as a terrorist organization, further complicating the diplomatic discourse.
As the international community watches closely, the ICJ's response to South Africa's case could significantly impact the global narrative around the conflict in Gaza. However, scepticism exists about the ICJ's ability to halt violence, as previous instances in Myanmar and Ukraine have not seen successful intervention.
This move by South Africa highlights the increasing trend of states turning to international courts to shape global narratives around conflicts, with the use of strong terms like "genocide" adding a potent dimension to the diplomatic disputes on the world stage.