Zionist entity faces Gaza ‘genocide’ case at UN court
The Zionist entity and South Africa face off at the UN’s top court from Thursday, after Pretoria accused the entity of “genocidal acts” in Gaza, charges the Zionists have dismissed as “blood libel”.
In an 84-page submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), South Africa urged judges to order the Zionist entity to “immediately suspend its military operations” in Gaza. South Africa alleges that the entity “has engaged in, is engaging in, and risks further engaging in genocidal acts against the Palestinian people in Gaza”.
The Zionist entity has angrily hit back at the accusations, with government spokesman Eylon Levy vowing to fight the South African case he described as “absurd blood libel”. “How tragic that the rainbow nation that prides itself on fighting racism will be fighting pro bono for anti-Jewish racists,” added Levy. “No, South Africa, it is not we who have come to perpetrate genocide, it is Hamas,” said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Top officials from the two countries will face off in the ICJ’s Great Hall of Justice housed in the extravagant Peace Palace in The Hague.
The Zionist entity’s relentless ground and air military campaign in Gaza has killed more than 22,835 people, mostly women and children, according to the territory’s health ministry. The entity claims the bombardment is aimed at destroying Hamas after the Palestinian resistance group attacked southern Zionist communities and military bases on Oct 7.
Around 1,140 people, mostly civilians, died in the attack and subsequent Zionist military operation aimed at regaining control of communities targeted by Hamas. The United Nations estimates 1.9 million Palestinians in Gaza are displaced, with fears growing of famine and disease.
The ICJ rules on disputes between states and while its decisions are legally binding, it has limited power to enforce them. The court could in theory order the Zionist entity to stop its invasion, but it is highly doubtful it would be obeyed. In March 2022, the ICJ ordered Russia to “immediately suspend” its invasion of Ukraine — a directive Moscow has ignored.
Johann Soufi, a lawyer and international justice expert, told AFP there would be an “extremely significant symbolic impact” if the court ruled against the entity. “Of course, there is the problem of implementing the decision. But at the end of the day, international justice is all there is left,” said Soufi, who worked for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees in Gaza.
‘Criminally complicit’
South Africa has filed the case against the Zionist entity because both countries have signed the UN Genocide Convention, created in 1948 as a response to the Holocaust. Any country that has signed the convention can sue another at the ICJ if they disagree on the “interpretation, application or fulfilment” of the rules designed to prevent genocide.
South Africa said it was “acutely aware of the particular weight of responsibility in initiating proceedings against (the Zionist entity) for violations of the Genocide Convention”. It also “unequivocally” condemned the Hamas attack but said “no armed attack ... no matter how serious ... can provide any possible justification for breaches” of the Genocide Convention.
Pretoria’s case is that the Zionist entity’s action in Gaza is “intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group”. It says the entity’s “genocidal acts” stem from the killing of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, forced displacement, and preventing adequate aid access, resulting in starvation.
South Africa wants the ICJ to impose so-called “provisional measures”, or emergency actions, while the broader case is being considered — which would probably take years. “The circumstances could not be more urgent,” argues Pretoria, describing an “exceptionally brutal military campaign by (the Zionist entity) in Gaza, which is extensive and ongoing”.
Other measures requested by South Africa include reparations and reconstruction of Gaza, plus the safe return of displaced Palestinian refugees. The case has been dismissed in Washington as “meritless, counterproductive and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever”.