In the framework of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, South Africa's case
against Israel in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is a noteworthy legal
and diplomatic move. An summary of the history, arguments made in favor of South
Africa, and the ramifications of that decision to file a complaint against
Israel in the International Court of Justice are given in this paper. It
examines the main concerns at hand, including claims of transgressions of
international law, especially those pertaining to Palestinian and human rights.
This paper also looks at the case's larger ramifications for international law,
diplomacy, and efforts to end the Israeli-Palestinian problem peacefully. This
paper attempts to add to a fuller understanding of the complexities and
obstacles of obtaining justice and accountability in the context of protracted
conflicts by critically examining the legal and political aspects of this case.
Introduction And Background Of The Case
The destruction of Gaza and the growing death toll have sparked protests around
the world, putting the long-standing problem front and center in international
affairs.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict dates back over a century to the Balfour
Declaration, which was signed by Britain during World War I and promised to
establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. By late October
1917, British forces had wrested control of the region from the Ottoman Empire.
Jews started migrating in huge numbers to Palestine as a result of the Nazi
movement in Europe, which intensified the exodus. In Palestine, the percentage
of Jews rose from 6% to 33% between 1918 and 1947. The demographic shift worried
the Palestinians, and tensions increased, which resulted in the 1936–1939
Palestinian uprising. Zionist groups kept up their advocacy for a Jewish
homeland in Palestine in the meantime.
Palestinians were forced to leave when
armed Zionist groups began attacking them. The political movement known as
Zionism demanded the establishment of a Jewish state in the late 19th century.The issue was brought before the recently established United Nations
while violence tore across Palestine. Resolution 181, passed by the UN in 1947,
proposed for the division of Palestine into Arab and Jewish nations, giving the
Jews ownership of around 55% of the territory. Fourty-five percent of the land
went to the Arabs, and Jerusalem became an internationalized area.
There are presently two distinct populations in the city: the
majority-Palestinian East Jerusalem and the mostly-Jewish West Jerusalem. Not
recognized by the international world, Israel took control of both East
Jerusalem and the West Bank during the Six-Day War in 1967.
For Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike, the Old City in occupied East Jerusalem
is sacred ground. There is a mosque complex called Al-Aqsa, which is referred to
as Temple Mount by Jews and al-Haram al-Sharif by Muslims. As a World Heritage
Site, the UN named it in 1981.
Zionist forces ethnically removed more than 750,000 Palestinians from their
homes in the years before Israel was founded in 1948. The Nakba, or calamity, is
the name given to this huge migration. The 1967 Six-Day War resulted in the
displacement of an additional 300,000 Palestinians. Although Israel annexed East
Jerusalem in 1980, the region is still regarded as occupied by the international
world. The capital of the future state that the Palestinians envision is East
Jerusalem.
The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993 with the goal of bringing about peace in five
years, were a deal between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian
leader Yasser Arafat. The two sides had never recognized one another before.
Areas A, B, and C were the divisions made into the occupied West Bank by a
second agreement in 1995. Following the Oslo Accords, Israel essentially
retained sovereignty over the West Bank, offering the newly established
Palestinian Authority only restricted rule over eighteen percent of the
territory.
But when Jewish colonies known as Israeli settlements rose quickly on
Palestinian territory in the West Bank, the Oslo Accords gradually came apart.
Between 1993 and September 2023, the West Bank and East Jerusalem settlement
populations increased from about 250,000 to as much as 700,000 people. Following
the ascent to power of the Hamas organization in 2007, Israel placed an embargo
on Gaza. Even now, the siege is still ongoing.
Additionally, Israel controls
East Jerusalem and the West Bank, which the Palestinians desire to be a
component of their future state. Following a surprise strike by Hamas within
Israel, Israel shut off the Gaza Strip's supply of petroleum, food, water, and
power on October 9 and enforced a complete embargo.
What Is South Africa Vs. Israel Case?
South Africa's Allegations: Many Palestinians, including children, have been
killed in Gaza; their homes have been destroyed; and Israeli soldiers have
driven them from their homes.
It also consists of an embargo on the strip's access to food, water, and medical
care; steps are implemented to prevent Palestinian births by destroying vital
health services that are necessary for expectant mothers and their unborn
children to survive.
South Africa's Immediate Demand: Through the use of "provisional measures,"
which are effectively emergency orders that may be implemented even before the
main case begins, South Africa is seeking that the ICJ act quickly to stop
Israel from committing more crimes in the strip. The argument put up is that
temporary measures are required in order to safeguard the rights of the
Palestinian people under the Genocide Convention from additional, severe, and
irreversible harm, which is still being committed with impunity.
ISRAEL'S Stand: Israel, which has criticized South Africa for initiating the
lawsuit, has committed to defend itself in court. The case, according to Israeli
officials, is "preposterous" and amounts to a "blood libel." Israel will boldly
submit its case for exercising self-defense in accordance with our most
fundamental right under international humanitarian law, arguing that the death
of over 30,000 people in Gaza was done in self-defense.
Stand of International Community: South Africa's lawsuit has received support
from several nations and institutions. Among them are members of the
Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), Namibia, Pakistan, Bolivia, the
Maldives, Malaysia, Turkey, Jordan, and Colombia. While the US, Israel's biggest
ally and source of weaponry, has remained mute, the European Union has offered
assistance, saying that "Israel must prevent civilian harm and investigate
allegations of humanitarian crimes." France has threatened to not comply if
Israel is found guilty of genocide, and both the UK and France are against the
case.
What Is Genocide Convention?
The 1948 United Nations General Assembly enacted the international treaty known
as the Genocide Convention, formerly known as the Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. It states that genocide is a crime that
is sanctioned by international law.
The treaty defines genocide as any of the following crimes carried out with the
intention of eradicating a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, either
whole or in part:
- Killing members of the group.
- Causing serious bodily or mental harms to members of the group.
- Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
- Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
- Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Whether genocide is perpetrated during a period of peace or conflict, the
agreement declares it to be illegal under international law. Additionally, it
requires member governments to stop and punish genocide.
Numerous nations have accepted the Genocide Convention, which is seen as a
crucial tool for both preventing and punishing the crime of genocide.
What Is International Court Of Justice?
The UN Charter created the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1945, making
it the main court system within the UN. Its functions include resolving legal
disputes between nations and offering advisory views on legal matters presented
to it by specialized agencies and recognized UN bodies. It is situated in The
Hague, Netherlands.
- Composition and Jurisdiction: The fifteen judges that make up the International Court of Justice are chosen for nine-year periods by the UN Security Council and General Assembly. Its authority stems from the assent of the disputing states, which may be granted in one of two ways: by consenting, in advance of the court's action, to refer a particular matter to the ICJ through a special agreement (compromis). By voluntarily granting the ICJ universal jurisdiction, the state consents to having its future conflicts handled by the court unless it specifically withholds its accede.
- Advisory Function: In addition, the ICJ offers advisory opinions on legal matters that are presented to it by specialized agencies and recognized UN bodies. Though advisory in nature and not legally obligatory, these judgments are widely recognized and have considerable weight in the field of international law.
- Legal Basis and Decisions: International law, which includes customary international law, treaties, conventions, and basic legal concepts accepted by civilized states, serves as the foundation for the ICJ's rulings. Though there are few avenues for reconsideration or interpretation, its rulings are final and enforceable against the parties to a dispute.
- Enforcement and Limitations: Although the rulings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are legally enforceable, governments' voluntary cooperation makes enforcement difficult. Since the ICJ lacks a mechanism of its own for enforcing its rulings, Chapter VII of the UN Charter authorizes the UN Security Council to take action in the form of sanctions or other measures.
- Significance and Criticism: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is vital to the amicable resolution of international conflicts and advances the body of international law. However, issues with state sovereignty and political concerns, the voluntary nature of state agreement to its authority, and the absence of a direct enforcement mechanism may restrict its efficacy.
In conclusion, the International Court of Justice, which functions within the
bounds of international law and the United Nations, is a crucial institution for
the amicable resolution of international conflicts.
Latest Revisions On South Africa Vs Israel
According to Reuters, a government official confirmed that South Africa's
Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor had traveled to The Hague to see the court's
ruling. Instead of ruling on the central issue of whether Israel is committing
genocide, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will examine potential
emergency measures that South Africa has requested be used to curb Israel's
conduct on Friday. South Africa requested the International Court of Justice,
often known as the World Court, to immediately halt Israel's catastrophic
military operation in the Palestinian enclave during two days of proceedings
earlier in January.
Nine injunctions were filed with the court by South Africa. Among them are those
for an order directing Israel to cease all military activities within Gaza and
another for Israel to assist, not obstruct, the entry of humanitarian supplies
into Gaza. The court may design the interim remedies it thinks most suitable,
but it is not required to adopt precisely the steps that South Africa asked.
These steps are meant to stop a conflict from growing worse while the court
considers the entire case, which may take many years.
The team of leading legal counsel for each state presents oral arguments and
counterarguments during the arduous ICJ deliberations, which begin with
comprehensive written submissions. A decision in this matter may take three or
four years, according to experts. Provisional remedies might be approved in the
meantime if South Africa took sufficient steps to demonstrate the validity of
its claims under the genocide treaty and the fact that the Palestinian
population in Gaza is in actual danger of suffering irreversible harm.
Becker predicted that the court will certainly comment on Israel's military
action at Friday's public session, but he did not think the court would put an
end to the Israeli assault.
The legal expert and lecturer at Trinity College in Dublin stated, "I'm not
convinced that they will be willing to go as far as South Africa has asked them
to go-the suspension of military activities." He continued by saying that the
International Court of Justice will probably uphold the stance taken by the
United Nations in its resolution from December and give Israel instructions to
make sure that any military action is carried out in compliance with
international law and that the distribution of humanitarian supplies is not
impeded. The ICJ's decisions are final and enforceable without the need for an
appeal, yet the court is unable to implement them. It is uncertain if Israel
will comply if it granted any or all of South Africa's eight requests for
so-called interim measures.
Israel called the accusations of genocide "grossly distorted" and asserted its
right to self-defense against Hamas, the Palestinian organization that launched
an unexpected onslaught on the country on October 7 that resulted in the deaths
of at least 1,139 people and the kidnapping of almost 240 more, according to
Israeli officials. Israel claims that it is not targeting people in Gaza, but
rather Hamas. According to Palestinian officials in Gaza, since October 2023,
the Israeli assault has killed over 30,000 individuals, the most of whom were
women and children.
Although Israel frequently disavows UN investigations and international courts,
claiming they are biased and unjust, the government did send a top legal team
for two days of hearings earlier in January.
The nation's reputation abroad would suffer greatly from any court decision to
stop activities. The United States, Israel's biggest ally and supplier of
armaments, has offered assistance; the European Union has been mute on the
issue.
Additional Updates
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been petitioned by South Africa to
impose further emergency measures on Israel because to its Gaza war, according
to the court. South Africa petitioned the court to order that all parties cease
hostilities and release all hostages and detainees, citing the threat of famine
affecting Palestinians in Gaza.
The South African presidency cautioned that the
people of Gaza cannot wait in a statement released on Wednesday. "A complete
famine is now a real possibility. The court stated that in order to avert the
impending catastrophe, it must take prompt action to guarantee the protection of
the rights it has determined are in jeopardy under the Genocide Convention.
Additionally, South Africa requested that Israel adopt "immediate and effective
measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and
humanitarian assistance to address famine and starvation" in Gaza, asking the
court to rule on this matter. It stated that due to the "extreme urgency of the
situation," the International Court of Justice, often known as the World Court,
should adopt these actions without holding further hearings.
Inaction on the part of the UN might "almost certainly" result in widespread
hunger in the Gaza Strip. As the enclave has been under Israeli siege and
assault since October, aid organizations have pointed the finger at military
activities, insecurity, and significant barriers to the delivery of necessary
supplies for the food scarcity there. According to health officials in Gaza, the
five-month conflict has claimed the lives of almost 30,000 individuals in the
strip. Palestinian authorities claim that since Israel began its attack, at
least 20 people have perished in Gaza from famine and malnourishment.
Israel rejected South Africa's plea to increase humanitarian aid to Gaza in
response to an impending famine on March 18, 2024, calling it "morally
repugnant" and asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) not to issue
emergency directives. As evidenced by the acts it has taken and is taking in
Gaza, Israel stated in a legal document submitted to the highest court of the
United Nations on Monday that it "has real concern for the humanitarian
situation and innocent lives.
Defense attorneys for Israel refuted claims that
the besieged enclave, where tens of thousands of Palestinians have died and
starvation is on the rise, is being intentionally caused to suffer humanitarian
hardship. They said that South Africa was abusing the process by repeatedly
requesting more measures.
According to the document, the claims made by South Africa in its March 6
request for additional measures are "morally repugnant, wholly unfounded in fact
and law, and represent an abuse both of the Genocide Convention and of the court
itself." Following the October 7 Hamas strikes on Israel, South Africa is
continuing to accuse Israel of state-led genocide in Gaza. This exchange between
the parties is a part of that ongoing legal action.
Israel was given an
injunction in January by the International Court of Justice (ICJ, often called
the World Court) to ensure that Israeli troops do not perform any acts that
could be considered violations of the Genocide Convention against Palestinians
in Gaza. Israel called the accusation of genocide "baseless." Essential help to
Gaza's 2.3 million residents is reportedly being severely curtailed, according
to relief agencies.
Since October 7, Israel has sealed off Gaza and stopped the inflow of
desperately needed gasoline. In order to prevent a problem from getting worse
until the International Court of Justice (ICJ) can hear the entire case-a
procedure that typically takes several years-emergency measures function as
temporary injunctions.
On the same day that the UN World Food Programme said
that "famine is imminent" in northern Gaza, Israel released their reaction.
According to the agency, roughly half of Gaza's population might become very
hungry if Israel's attack were to intensify any more, with 70% of the remaining
population already suffering from catastrophic hunger.
Health officials in Gaza estimate that the more than five-month offensive has
killed close to 32,000 Palestinians in the strip. On October 7, Hamas strikes in
southern Israel claimed 1,139 more lives. Israel then declared war on Gaza.
According to Palestinian officials, since Israel started its attack on Gaza, at
least 20 people have perished from famine and malnourishment. Josep Borrell, the
senior diplomat for the European Union, declared on Monday that "starvation is
used as a weapon of war" and that the looming famine in Gaza was "entirely
man-made." "Trucks have halted. "People are dying as a result of the artificial
closure of land crossings," he claimed.
Pretoria has petitioned the International Court of Justice twice, the second
time in support of South Africa's plea. Its initial request, made in February,
to put pressure on Israel to stop an offensive against Rafah, a city in southern
Gaza, was turned down.
Conclusion
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) case that South Africa filed against
Israel has spurred a heated global discussion. The case has a complicated legal
background because it centers on claims that Israel committed genocide in Gaza
during its war operations. The result is important for both easing the Gaza
conflict and serving as a litmus test for the "rules-based international order."
The opinions expressed about the international legal system will be
significantly shaped by the rulings rendered by the ICJ in the upcoming months.
Citations:
- https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-editorials/icj-proceedings-south-africa-vs-israel
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/3/6/israels-war-on-gaza-live-un-food-convoy-blocked-from-north-gaza-by-israel
- https://www.icj-cij.org/case/192
- https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/explained-south-africas-genocide-case-against-israel-over-war-in-gaza-4935967
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/11/a-quick-guide-to-south-africas-icj-case-against-israel
Written By: Zoya Khan, 3rd Year BA LLB(H) Amity University Noida
Please Drop Your Comments