Israel genocide hearing day 1: Key takeaways
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Thursday opened its first hearing into whether Israel is committing genocide of Palestinians and other crimes in its war on Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
South Africa, which brought the case against Israel last month, is asking the United Nations court to issue an injunction to force Israel to stop the violence in Gaza, preserve evidence related to crimes of genocide, block the displacement of Palestinians and restore access to basic necessities, among other conditions.
The case comes as around 23,000 Palestinians have died in Gaza since early October, when Israel declared war against the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which killed more than 1,200 people and took about 240 hostages in a surprise attack on southern Israel.
A panel of judges at the ICJ Peace Palace in the Hague, Netherlands, listened only to South Africa’s case in the first day of arguments. Judges will hear oral counterarguments from Israel on Friday, but Israeli officials have already blasted the case as one without merit.
Here are key takeaways from the first day of the trial.
South Africa accused Israel of ‘pattern of genocidal conduct’
FILE – In this photo provided by Photo host Agency RIA Novosti, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa gestures while speaking to Russian President Vladimir Putin, not in photo, during their talks after a meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, June 17, 2023. South Africa’s president said Tuesday, July 18, 2023 that arresting Putin — should he show up at an economic summit next month in Johannesburg — would amount to a “declaration of war” by his country. (Ramil Sitdikov/Photo host Agency RIA Novosti via AP)
South Africa tied the case to a historical pattern of oppression against the Palestinian people, who today live in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
South African lawyers said the Palestinian people have been oppressed since the founding of Israel in 1948, which displaced the Palestinian people in what they call the Nakba, or “catastrophe” in Arabic. Israel took control of Gaza and the West Bank in 1967 and ruled Gaza until withdrawing in 2005, but has enacted a blockade around the coastal enclave since.
South Africa argued the blanket attacks in Gaza fail to comply with international law and are not justified by the initial Hamas attack into Israel.
“No armed attack on a state territory — no matter how serious, even an attack involving atrocity crimes — can provide any justification for or defense to breaches to the convention,” South African Justice Minister Ronald Lamola said, citing the Genocide Convention.
“Israel’s response to the October 7th, 2023, attack has crossed this line.”
The Genocide Convention is an international treaty requiring that nations take steps to prevent genocide with 153 countries party to it, including South Africa and Israel.
South African lawyer Adila Hassim said Israel has conducted one of the deadliest bombing campaigns in modern war history while Israel’s blockade of Gaza has stripped Palestinians of basic necessities. She also said Israel is deliberately destroying social infrastructure and bombing designated safe zones for civilians.
“The level of Israel’s killing is so extensive that nowhere is safe in Gaza,” she said. “Hundreds of multigenerational families have been wiped out with no remaining survivors. Mothers, fathers, children, siblings, grandparents, aunts, cousins, often all killed together.”
South Africa also highlighted fringe Israeli officials who have called to wipe out all Gazans and presented a November video of Israeli soldiers chanting there are no “uninvolved civilians” in Gaza.
Hassim said South Africa must only prove that Israel has violated the Genocide Convention as she argued the Israeli campaign is “inflicted deliberately” against the Palestinian people in a “pattern of genocidal conduct.”
“Our news feeds show graphic images of suffering that have become unbearable to watch,” she said. “Nothing will stop the suffering except an order from this court.”
Israel dismissive of the claims
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a press conference with Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Cabinet Minister Benny Gantz in the Kirya military base in Tel Aviv, Israel, Oct. 28. (Abir Sultan/Pool Photo via AP, file)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a video address this week that troops are fighting against Hamas and not Palestinian civilians.
“Our goal is to rid Gaza of Hamas terrorists and free our hostages,” Netanyahu said. “Once this is achieved, Gaza can be demilitarized and deradicalized, thereby creating a possibility for a better future for Israel and Palestinians alike.”
Netanyahu said Israel is also taking steps to minimize civilian casualties and accused Hamas of using civilians as shields.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry also dismissed South Africa’s claims.
“What is happening at the [ICJ] is a perversion of the word justice and an embarrassment to all who believe in human rights,” the ministry wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.
Pro-Israel demonstrators also protested outside of the ICJ in The Hague on Thursday and demanded the release of the some 130 hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza.
Israel is expected to present a more robust defense Friday.
South Africa makes unique litigator
South Africa shook off apartheid in 1994. The South African apartheid system had oppressed the country’s Black residents for decades and segregated the population between Black and white.
South Africa invoked former South African president and famed leader Nelson Mandela, who successfully ended apartheid, in opening arguments.
South African lawyer Max du Plessis said South Africa was bringing the case on an individual and collective right to stand up for the rights of the Palestinians, urging the ICJ to protect civilians in Gaza.
“It is beyond doubt that South Africa is entitled to invoke the responsibility of Israel in the Genocide Convention,” he said. “The events unfolding in Gaza at the hands of the Israeli forces are frighteningly unprecedented. … The rights of the Palestinians in Gaza are no less worthy of this court’s considerable protective power.”
South Africa has been criticized for its close ties with authoritarian governments, including Russia and China, which have both faced accusations of genocide in recent years.
Genocide rulings at ICJ unprecedented
A ruling from the ICJ is final and binding but can technically be ignored.
Russia ignored a court order in 2022 to stop invading Ukraine.
And the U.S. ignored an ICJ reparations order to Nicaragua in 1986 and a 2018 ruling to make exceptions on sanctions against Iran.
In the event an order is ignored, the ICJ can appeal to the United Nations Security Council, but member nations, including Israel’s ally, the U.S., have veto power at the council.
More Top Stories from The Hill
House conservatives huddle with Speaker Johnson on alternate spending deal
Hunter Biden’s daughter hits back at Greene for ‘lying’ at House hearing
Senate GOP caught off guard by talks of alternative spending deal: ‘Good luck’
The ICJ has never before ruled an entire country has committed genocide, though one case came close.
In 2007, the ICJ ruled that Serbia failed to prevent the 1995 genocide at the town of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina but did not rule the country had committed genocide as a whole.
The ICJ has also taken a pending case accusing Myanmar of genocide against the minority Rohingya population.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
