Genocide Convention: South Africa v. Israel at the ICJ (Day 1)
South Africa made its oral arguments this morning during the first public hearing for their genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court. Their legal team is currently seeking provisional measures to stop Israel’s assault on Gaza. Israel is scheduled to make theirs arguments tomorrow (Friday) morning.
Earlier today,
published a number of clips from the first portion of the hearing as a thread on X (formerly Twitter).Those posts are reproduced below. To watch the full hearing, which continued well beyond the portion excerpted here, please see @Sam here.
South African Ambassador to the Netherlands, Vusi Madonsela:
“Today we are joined in court by representatives of the Palestinian state... Palestinians who work in the field of human rights, including residents of Gaza, who were in Gaza just a few days ago. They are some of the lucky ones who managed to get out of Gaza. Their future, and the future of their fellow Palestinians who are still in Gaza, depends on the decision this court will make on this matter.”
South African Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola:
“South Africa unequivocally condemned the targeting of civilians by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups—and the taking of hostages—on the 7th of October (...)
That said, no armed attack (...) no matter how serious—even an attack involving atrocity crimes—can provide any justification for, or defense to, breaches to the Convention, whether as a matter of law or morality.
Israel's response to the 7th of October, 2023 attack has crossed this line, and give rise to the breaches of the Convention.
Faced with such evidence and our duty to do what we can do to prevent genocide as contained in Article 1 of the Convention, the South African government initiated this case.”
South Africa’s case will be presented by a team of six legal counsels,” says Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola at the ICJ, respectively focusing on:
1. An overview of the risk of genocidal acts
2. Israel's alleged genocidal intent
3. The prima facie jurisdiction
4. The various rights currently under threat
5. The argument of agency & potential irreparable harm
6. The provisional measures
Per The Namibian,
South Africa’s case is presented by a team of legal practitioners, including minister Ronald Lamola, Adila Hassim, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, John Dugard, Max du Plessis, Blinne ni Ghralaigh and Vaughan Lowe
Adila Hassim calls South Africa v. Israel “a case that underscores the very essence of our shared humanity as expressed in the preamble to the Genocide Convention.”
“South Africa contends that Israel has transgressed Article II of the Convention by committing actions that fall within the definition of Genocide.”
“The actions show a systematic pattern of conduct from which genocide can be inferred.”
Adila Hassim provides some brief background & context for understanding South Africa's genocide case against Israel, then summarizes the current situation:
“For the past 96 days, Israel has subjected Gaza to what has been described as one of the heaviest conventional bombing campaigns in the history of modern warfare.
Palestinians in Gaza are being killed by Israeli weaponry and bombs from air, land, and sea.
They are also at immediate risk of death by starvation, dehydration, and disease as a result of the ongoing siege by Israel, the destruction of Palestinian towns, the insufficient aid being allowed through to the Palestinian population, and the impossibility of distributing this limited aid while bombs fall.
This conduct renders essentials to life unobtainable.”
“At this provisional measures stage—as this court has made clear in the Gambia and Myanmar case—it is NOT necessary for the court to come to a final view on the question of whether Israel's conduct constitutes genocide,” says Adila Hassim at the ICJ.
“It is necessary to establish ONLY whether at least SOME of the acts alleged are capable of falling within the provisions of the convention.”
“On analyzing the specific and ongoing genocidal acts complained of, it is CLEAR that at least SOME—if not all—of these acts fall within the provisions.”
She notes that “these acts are documented in detail in South Africa's application” to the court and “confirmed by reliable—often UN—sources,” but says she will highlight some of them “in order to illustrate the pattern of genocidal conduct.”
Specifically, she says she will demonstrate how Israel's conduct “violates Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d of the Convention.”
Adila Hassim lays out the first genocidal act committed by Israel:
“The mass killing of Palestinians in Gaza, in violation of Article 2a of the Genocide Convention.”
Adila Hassim briefly summarizes the second genocidal act identified in South Africa’s application:
“Israel’s infliction of serious bodily or mental harm to Palestinians in Gaza, in violation of Article 2b of the Genocide Convention.”
Adila Hassim lays out the third genocidal act identified by South Africa:
“Israel has deliberately imposed conditions on Gaza that cannot sustain life, and are calculated to bring about its physical destruction,” in violation of Article 2c of the Genocide Convention.
Adila Hassim describes violations of Article 2d of the Genocide Convention by Israel:
Inflicting “reproductive violence” on Palestinian “women, newborn babies, infants, and children,” including “imposing measures intended to prevent births within a group.”
In her concluding remarks, Adila Hassim says that “all of these acts, individually and collectively, form a calculated pattern of conduct by Israel indicating a genocidal intent,” and urges prompt intervention from the court.
“In the Gambia and Myanmar case, this court did not hesitate to impose provisional measures (...) the facts before the court today are, sadly, even more stark, and—like the Gambia and Myanmar case—deserve and demand this court's intervention.”
“EVERY DAY there is mounting, irreparable loss of life, property, dignity, and humanity for the Palestinian people. Our news feeds show graphic images of suffering that has become unbearable to watch.”
“Nothing will stop the suffering except an order from this court. Without an indication of provisional measures, the atrocities will continue, with the [IDF] indicating that it intends pursuing this course of action for a least a year.”
As noted earlier, these clips are all taken from the first portion of today’s hearings. To watch the full thing, see here.
For more reporting like this, please follow Decensored News on your favorite social media platforms, bookmark the website, and subscribe here on Substack. Thank you for your interest and support.