[ad_1]
The United Nations’ highest judicial body, the International Court of Justice, will this week begin hearing a lawsuit filed by South Africa accusing Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip.
This hearing is the first step in a long process if the case goes forward, and marks the first time Israel has chosen to directly defend itself in such a situation, highlighting the seriousness of the charges and the This will prove just how high the stakes are. International Reputation and Status.
Genocide was a term first used by a Polish Jewish lawyer in 1944 to describe the Nazis’ systematic killing of approximately 6 million Jews and other people based on their ethnicity. It is one of the most serious crimes that can be charged.
In its submission to the court, South Africa cited lawyer Raphael Lemkin, who elaborated on the definition of genocide. South Africa, whose post-apartheid government has long supported the Palestinian cause, has condemned Israel’s actions against Hamas in Gaza as having “the character of genocide”. The report says Israel has killed Palestinian civilians, inflicted severe physical and psychological harm, and subjected Gaza residents to “living conditions calculated to cause physical destruction.”
Gaza health officials say more than 23,000 Palestinians have been killed in the past three months, the majority of them women and children. And most of the enclave’s 2.2 million residents have been displaced since the war began, increasing the risk of disease and starvation, according to international organizations.
This claim, which Israel flatly denies, was founded after the near-total destruction of European Jewry and quickly became a haven for hundreds of thousands of Jews expelled from Arab lands. This is of particular significance to Israel.
Israel, a signatory to the 1948 International Convention against Genocide, has kept details of its defense in court. But Israeli leaders say South Africa’s claims misrepresent the meaning of genocide and the purpose of the treaty. They say a more appropriate case could be brought against Hamas, an internationally recognized terrorist organization that is the target of Israeli military operations in Gaza.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog said on Tuesday: “There is nothing more brutal and ridiculous than this allegation.” “In fact, our enemy Hamas, in its charter, calls for the destruction and annihilation of the state of Israel, the only nation-state of the Jewish people.”
Former Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked called the genocide allegation a “blood libel” and echoed centuries of anti-Semitism in which Jews killed non-Jewish babies in order to drink their own blood. He cited metaphors and argued that the South African government was exploiting this defamation. This is an incident designed to divert the public’s attention from their own country’s domestic issues.
The International Court of Justice adjudicates disputes between states, and the first hearing in the Israel case will be held in The Hague on Thursday and Friday.
The incident brought public condemnation of Israel’s war efforts in many developing countries into the public arena. In December, the United Nations General Assembly passed a non-binding resolution calling for a ceasefire, proposed by the Arab Group and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. The Security Council then passed a binding resolution, also championed by Arab states, calling for more humanitarian aid.
South Africa filed an 84-page application with the court in December, citing statements from Israeli officials, alleging that it was a “clear and direct link to unchecked and unpunished genocide. It amounts to public incitement.”
The Israelis point out that some of the evidence cited by South Africa is weak. Examples include comments made by Israeli pop star Eyal Golan in a television interview in which he said Israel should “erase” Gaza.
In a statement released late Tuesday, Israel’s attorney general and state prosecutors said any call for intentional harm to civilians could fall under the crime of aiding and abetting. “Several such incidents are currently being investigated by Israeli law enforcement authorities,” the statement added.
South Africans have long sympathized with Palestinians and equated their lives in Gaza and the occupied West Bank with the oppression they suffered under apartheid. Nelson Mandela articulated this relationship in his 1997 speech: “We know very well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.”
The country’s justice minister, Ronald Lamola, who is leading the delegation in The Hague, said these sentiments were driving South Africa’s case. “We believe it is important for a country like South Africa, which experienced the discrimination of apartheid, to stand firm against the Palestinian people,” he said in an interview.
Israel says it did not choose war, but was forced into it after Hamas crossed the border and attacked Israel on October 7. The attack killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, the newspaper said. Israeli authorities announced that it was the deadliest day in Israel’s 75-year history and for Jews since the Holocaust. Of the 240 prisoners captured on October 7, more than 100 are still being held in Gaza.
UN rapporteurs said in a statement on Monday that Hamas-led acts of murder, hostage-taking, rape and mutilation may amount to war crimes and, given their scope, possibly crimes against humanity. He said that there is.
Although a final ruling could take years, South Africa is asking the court to order Israel to immediately cease military operations under a state of emergency clause.
William Shabazz, former chairman of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry into Israel’s military operations in the Gaza Strip, said: “To win an interim measures order, South Africa must prove that the charges of genocide are ‘plausible.’ It’s just a matter of convincing the court.” He is Professor of International Law at Middlesex University, London.
Professor Shabazz said South Africa had so far only presented the “bones of the case” and it would take months to gather all the evidence. “Only then can we really assess the full extent of the South African case,” he said.
Court decisions are usually binding, but there are few ways to enforce them. In 2004, the court issued a non-binding opinion. It argued that Israel’s construction of a security barrier within the occupied West Bank territory was illegal and that it should be removed. Twenty years later, the wall and fence system is still in place.
Even if Israel complied with the injunction, Hamas, which is not bound by international law of war, would not be forced to cease fighting as well.
The Israeli military insists it is waging the war in accordance with international law. Officials noted that messages asking Gazan civilians to evacuate to safe areas ahead of bombing attacks have been sent through various means, and that efforts are constantly being made to increase the amount of aid to Gaza. He said he is doing so.
They say the death toll in Gaza is due to Hamas’ use of residential areas and civilian buildings such as schools and hospitals to launch attacks, store weapons and hide fighters. It is said that this is one of the reasons.
The military’s chief spokesperson, Maj. Gen. Daniel Hagari, flatly refuted the genocide accusation, saying the court should instead focus on how the war began on October 7. “We were the ones who were slaughtered,” Admiral Hagari said.
In Israel, the case is being handled at the highest level. The government has appointed Aharon Barak, one of the country’s most eminent jurists, as a special judge to join the court on its behalf. (To hear the Gaza case, the court’s usual 15-judge panel will be expanded to 17, with one judge appointed by each side.)
Barak was given the job despite criticizing Israel’s right-wing government last year over planned judicial reforms. Barak, a former chief justice of Israel’s Supreme Court, is a Holocaust survivor who fled Nazi-occupied Lithuania as a boy.
Israel’s legal team in The Hague will be led by Malcolm Shaw, a British expert chosen for his experience litigating the world court. The South African team will be led by John Dugard, a highly regarded international legal scholar and former UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
In a statement, Hamas welcomed South Africa’s decision to file a lawsuit and, referring to Israel, called on “all countries to submit similar files and requests to the competent courts against this Nazi organization.” “I will.”
The United States, Israel’s most important ally, condemned South Africa’s petition. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby called this “worthless, counterproductive and completely baseless.”
South Africa’s government claims it is pursuing legal action to stop the genocide, but analysts say officials were likely motivated by domestic and foreign political pressure. ing.
During the two years that Russia has been pushing the Ukraine war, South Africa has fiercely resisted condemning its key ally. South African officials often point to what they call a double standard in taking these positions, with U.S. officials demanding support for Ukrainian sovereignty but little in the way of Palestinian demands. There was no interest, they said.
“South Africa wanted to make a very clear point, pointing out these contradictions in the global, institutional and multilateral order,” said Priyal Singh, a senior fellow at the Institute for Security Studies think tank.
Support for the Palestinians has long been a rallying point in South Africa, and politicians from the governing African National Congress are capitalizing on that support ahead of this year’s crucial national elections, Singh said. Told.
Patrick Kingsley, Marlies Simmons and Myra Novec Reports contributed
[ad_2]
Source link
