Afriforum, representing the Afrikaner community in South Africa, recently argued that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) should reject South Africa’s lawsuit against Israel, which claims genocide. Their stance is that the ongoing “Kill the Boer” rhetoric contradicts the very basis of this lawsuit.
During a rally, former US President Donald Trump was seen leading chants like “Kill the Boer” and “Kill the Farmers.” This was linked to remarks made by Julius Malema, an opposition figure, who had met with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. While Ramaphosa condemned such statements in a high-profile setting, he hasn’t publicly denounced them in South Africa itself, which raised eyebrows when he sidestepped a question from a local reporter about it.
Malema and his party, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), have repeatedly dismissed calls to abandon these chants in their statements and gatherings following the Oval Office meeting.
Trump criticized these chants as incitements to genocide, noting that many believe they could justify violence against white farmers in South Africa.
Criel commented that the “Kill the Boer” chant indeed violates the Genocide Convention of 1948. This is the same international agreement South Africa is invoking in its ICJ case against Israel, claiming that some comments from Israeli leaders amount to genocide.
Ramaphosa has stated that the government cannot effectively condemn or prevent the incitement of genocide, referring to these chants directly.
He further remarked that before critics and others in the media rush to condemn his comments, they should recognize that he’s using the very arguments the South African government has leveraged in its own lawsuit against Israel at the ICJ.
This was echoed by Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, who is representing South Africa at the ICJ, claiming that Israel’s inaction regarding these incitements amounts to a serious violation of the Genocide Treaty. He asserted that the government needs to counter such rhetoric to prevent a normalization that could endanger Palestinians in Israel.
Criel expressed concerns about how the ANC-led government may itself be violating the Genocide Treaty while simultaneously presenting evidence against Israel.
Criel has also represented Malema in court, arguing that the term “Boer” is not hate speech under the constitution, despite the complexities surrounding the issue. Some reports have pointed out that Ngcukaitobi misinterpreted statements from Israeli officials regarding biblical references that suggest violence.
It’s worth noting that Tembeka Ngcukaitobi has a history of dubious arguments. He defended Malema against “hate speech” claims linked to the “Kill the Boer” song, even though many white farmers feel it’s a call to violence. Ngcukaitobi maintained that the song is metaphorical, contrasting it with how biblical references are treated in Israel.
As of now, South Africa has not withdrawn its lawsuit against Israel in the ICJ. Trump, during a meeting, chose not to pressure Ramaphosa on this matter.
The ICJ currently oversees the procedural aspects of the case, giving Israel additional time while South Africa continues its legal efforts against Hamas, which has limited access to evidence from Israel.
