South Africa returns to ICJ against Israel genocide as more countries join the legal fight
South Africa has returned to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) situated at The Hague in Netherlands to file its memorial in the ongoing case against Israel.
In the memorial, South Africa intends to provide facts and evidence to prove that Israel is committing the crime of genocide in Palestine.
The Presidency said the case will continue until the international court makes a finding.
“While the case is in progress, we hope that Israel will abide by the court’s provisional orders issued to date,” Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya stated last month.
He added that the case represents a growing global effort towards ensuring peace in the Middle East, and several countries, namely, Nicaragua, Palestine, Turkey, Spain, Mexico, Libya and Colombia have joined South Africa’s case against Israel.
On Monday, Dr Atilla Kisla, the international justice cluster lead at Southern Africa Litigation Centre told broadcaster Newzroom Afrika that South Africa’s historical case has exposed the limitations of the ICJ.
“This case has highlighted the limitations of the court as an institution to ensure adherence to international law. The ICJ has not been designed to be an enforcement authority so it does not have these powers to enforce its own decisions. It is always up to the States to enforce those decisions by the ICJ,” Kisla told the news channel.
Last week, IOL reported that pro-Palestine demonstrations are surging as conflict continues in Palestinian territories and escalates in the Middle East.
The year-long on-ground and air bombing campaign by Israeli forces intent on obliterating Hamas has led to the tragic loss of thousands of lives, including innocent children.
In the latest series of protests and demonstrations, organised by local activists and supported by numerous community groups, a march held on Berea Road in Durban highlighting the deepening commitment of South Africans to advocate for Palestinian rights amid the widespread condemnation of violence and oppression.
Analysts say even though Israel has not adhered to the spirit of the three provisional measures orders issued by the International Court of Justice, South Africa’s case has not been in vain.
“I still think even though Israel is not adhering to the provisional measures issued by the ICJ, those provisional measures were important in order to inform public opinion but also to support the international community or States’ initiative,” said Kisla.
“It certainly had an impact outside this case especially also if we look at the proceedings at the ICC.”
Kisla underlined that the ICJ is limited to State versus State matters, yet Israel insists its case is against the militant Hamas group, which then limits the jurisdiction of the international court.
“Hamas is not a State and that is why the court cannot really make an order to that kind of entity. The ICJ is concerned about States and their obligations, whether they violate their obligations under international law,” said Kisla.
“So, the court in that regard is limited and in this case it is further limited to the provisions of the genocide convention and whether those provisions of the genocide convention have been breached.”
South Africa faces a mammoth task to convince the ICJ that Israeli authorities acted with genocidal intent in Gaza.
IOL