South Africa has filed an 80-page lawsuit before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) charging Israel with genocidal intent in its crimes against Palestinians in Gaza. Other countries backed this move.
Because of the claim’s urgency, a high-stakes hearing has been planned for January 11-12. However, in breaking with precedent, Israel has chosen to defend itself at the ICJ by preparing legal representation to respond to South Africa’s claims.
South Africa’s move received international notice, with Turkey and Malaysia expressing solidarity.
Oncu Keceli, spokesperson for Turkey’s Foreign Ministry, emphasized the necessity of holding those responsible for Palestinian casualties accountable under international law.
Via his “X” account, he stated, “We welcome the application filed by the Republic of South Africa with the International Court of Justice regarding Israel’s violation of its obligations under the 1948 “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. . . We hope that the process will be completed as soon as possible.”
Malaysia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs praised South Africa’s initiative and expressed hope for a quick conclusion.
In a press release issued on Tuesday, the Ministry said: “The legal action against Israel before ICJ is a timely and tangible step towards legal accountability for Israel’s atrocities in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) at large.”
Israel upholds its right to self-defense while highlighting efforts it claims to have implemented to reduce civilian casualties.
South Africa, on the other hand, argues that Israel’s actions go beyond self-defense, accusing it of premeditated targeting of Palestinian lives.
The past context of South Africa’s consistent support for the Palestinian cause lends weight to this legal approach. By drawing a parallel between the suffering of South Africa’s black majority during apartheid and the plight of the Palestinians, the move reinforces South Africa’s disapproval of Israel’s conduct and lends legitimacy to its perspective on the matter.
The move follows a recent parliamentary vote in South Africa to close the Israeli embassy and sever diplomatic relations.
Tensions grow as the ICJ prepares to hear South Africa’s urgent plea, leaving Israel in a delicate diplomatic and legal position. The outcome of this hearing could have far-reaching implications for the present conflict in Gaza and Israel’s international status, as well.
Under international law, Article II of the Genocide Convention describes genocide as “a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part.”
Parties to this international subpoena alleging Israel as the perpetrator are confident that the latter has fulfilled the criteria to be charged.