THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) – South Africa has filed a lawsuit with the United Nations Supreme Court alleging that Israel's military operation in Gaza amounts to genocide.
The application, and Israel's decision to defend itself at the International Court of Justice, set off a high-stakes showdown before the Grand Chamber's panel of judges.
More than 2,000 South African miners remain underground as trade union protests enter second day
This lawsuit will likely continue for years. At its heart is the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crimes of Genocide, developed in the aftermath of World War II and the Holocaust.
The convention defines genocide as acts such as murder “committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.”
Here we will discuss this incident and its implications in more detail.
What is South Africa's claim?
South Africa's 84-page application states that Israel's actions are “of a genocidal character, as they are aimed at destroying a significant portion” of the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip.
It is seeking a series of legally binding judgments from the ICJ, also known as the World Court. The tribunal declared to the court that Israel “has violated and continues to violate its obligations under the Genocide Convention,” requiring Israel to cease hostilities in Gaza that may constitute a violation of the Convention, and to pay reparations. , asking for an order to prepare for reconstruction. A view of what was destroyed in Gaza.
The application states that acts of genocide include the killing of Palestinians, the infliction of serious mental and physical harm, and the deliberate infliction of conditions intended to “bring about collective physical destruction.” It claims that it can be done. And statements from Israeli officials say it expresses genocidal intent.
South Africa claims the court has jurisdiction because both countries are signatories to the Genocide Convention. Article 9 of the treaty states that disputes between states over the treaty can be brought to the International Court of Justice.
Many South Africans, including President Cyril Ramaphosa, compare Israel's policies toward Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank to South Africa's past apartheid. Israel rejects such claims.
What was Israel's response?
The Israeli government quickly rejected the genocide claims. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that South Africa's lawsuit had no legal basis and amounted to a “despicable and contemptible use” of the courts.
Israeli Prime Minister's Office official Eilon Levy on Tuesday accused South Africa of a “political and legal cover-up” of the October 7 Hamas attack that triggered the Israeli operation. But he said he had confirmed that Israel would send a legal team to The Hague “to dispel South Africa's absurd bloody libel.”
Israeli officials said the country, which has a history of ignoring international courts, decided to defend itself for several reasons. These include Israel's role in promoting the original post-Holocaust genocide convention and Israel's belief that “we have a strong case.” The person spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing behind-the-scenes deliberations.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to press on with the war until Hamas is crushed and the more than 100 hostages still held by the extremist group in Gaza are freed. He said that could take several more months.
What happens next?
South Africa's motion includes asking the court to urgently issue a legally binding interim order requiring Israel to “immediately cease military operations in and against Gaza.”
Such orders, known as interim measures, would remain in place until the case progresses. Although these are legally binding, they are not always complied with. In 2022, in a case of genocide committed by Ukraine against Russia, a court ordered Russia to immediately stop its invasion. Orders were ignored and deadly attacks ensued.
The court will schedule a hearing soon. Lawyers in South Africa and Israel can make their case. It is expected to take days or weeks for judges selected from around the world to issue a ruling on the preliminary measures.
The court then enters a lengthy process to consider the entire case.
Israel could challenge jurisdiction and seek to have the case thrown out before its lawyers can begin arguments. Other countries that have signed the Genocide Convention may also apply.
Is the court hearing similar cases?
Two other genocide cases are pending in court. The lawsuit, filed by Ukraine shortly after Russia's invasion, accuses Russia of launching a military operation based on fabricated genocide claims and accuses Russia of planning acts of genocide in Ukraine. There is.
Another ongoing case involves Gambia, which is accusing Myanmar of genocide against the Rohingya Muslim minority on behalf of Muslim countries.
In a previous case brought by Bosnia, the court ruled in 2007 that Serbia had “breached its obligation to prevent genocide…with respect to the genocide that occurred in Srebrenica in July 1995”. The court refused to order Serbia to pay compensation. Croatia also sued Serbia in 2015, but the World Court ruled in that case that Serbia had not violated the treaty.
ICJ or ICC?
The Hague describes itself as an international city of peace and justice. It is home not only to his ICJ, but also to the International Criminal Court, which is based just a few miles (kilometers) away, near the North Sea coastline.
The two courts have different mandates.
The ICJ first opened in 1946, when the world was emerging from the carnage of World War II, to adjudicate cases between states. These often involve land or maritime border disputes or disagreements over the interpretation of international treaties.
ICC is younger. It began its work in 2002 with the noble goal of ending global impunity for atrocities. Unlike the ICJ, it aims to hold individuals criminally responsible for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
The ICC conducts ongoing investigations into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, dating back to the last war in Gaza. So far, no arrest warrant has been issued.
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan said last month that investigating possible crimes by Hamas militants and the Israeli military “is a priority for my office.”
What about past UN incidents?
Landmark genocide trials were also held in two now-defunct United Nations tribunals.
The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has indicted a number of people, including former President Radovan Karadzic and his military commander, General Ratko Mladic, for their roles in the July 1995 massacre of more than 8,000 men and boys during the Bosnian war. A high-ranking Bosnian Serb was convicted. The town of Srebrenica.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Karadžić and Mladic were sentenced to life in prison.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has convicted a series of leaders responsible for the 1994 genocide in Rwanda in which approximately 800,000 people, mostly Tutsis, were massacred in the African nation.
