In a
bid to obtain an ICJ emergency order for the suspension of Israel's relentless
97-day assault on Gaza, South African jurists including Justice Minister Ronald
Lamola argued that Israel is violating four articles of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, commonly called the Genocide
Convention. The landmark 1948 treaty—enacted, ironically, the same year as the
modern state of Israel was born, largely through the ethnic cleansing of
Palestine's Arabs—defines genocide as acts intended "to destroy, in whole
or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group."
South African lawyers detailed Israel's conduct in the war,
including the killing and wounding of more than 80,000 Palestinians, mostly
women and children, forcibly displacing over 85% of the besieged enclave's 2.3
million people, and inflicting conditions leading to widespread starvation and
disease. They also cited at length statements by Israeli officials
calling for the destruction and even nuclear annihilation of Gaza in their
presentations, which eschewed graphic imagery in favor of arguing "clear
legal rights."
"In its opening argument thus far, South Africa has
made a compelling case showing how the genocidal statements by [Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and other senior officials were interpreted as
official orders by Israeli forces in their attacks against Gaza," US
investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill said on social media.
"Beyond the citations of the vast civilian deaths and
injuries caused by Israel in Gaza, [South Africa's] lawyers argued effectively
that Israel's 'evacuation' orders were in and of themselves genocidal,
demanding the immediate flight of a million people, including patients in
hospitals," Scahill continued.
"What becomes crystal clear listening to the openly
genocidal words of Netanyahu and other Israeli officials is that they know
exactly what they are saying," he added. "And they are comfortable
saying these things publicly because they know the US will shield them from
accountability."
Left-wing
author and activist and former South African parliamentarian Andrew
Feinstein said, "South Africa's presentation to the ICJ thus far has
been exceptional, overwhelming, and devastating," opining that "the
only way the ICJ doesn't impose interim measures is if the judges are open to
pressure from 'the West.'"
"South Africa's lawyers have done the nonracial,
post-apartheid country proud," he added.
Legal scholar Nimer Sultany, a Palestinian citizen of
Israel, called South Africa's presentation "compellingly argued
and powerfully presented."
"Given the court's case law, and given the lower
threshold required for issuing provisional measures, it will be very surprising
if the court does not issue provisional measures against Israel," Sultany
asserted.
"This also should prompt reflection amongst all those
governments and media outlets who supported [Israel's war,] because they have
been supporting a genocide," he added.
Sultany and numerous other observers said the most powerful
presentation of the day was made by Irish lawyer and case adviser Blinne
Ní Ghrálaigh, who delivered South Africa's closing statement.
Israel—some
of whose officials have condemned South Africa's case as a meritless "blood
libel"—is scheduled to present its defense on Friday. Israeli jurists are
expected to focus heavily on the atrocities committed by Hamas-led attackers
who killed more than 1,100 Israelis and took around 240 others hostage on
October 07, 2023. They will likely argue that the country has a right to defend
itself, and that it is seeking to eliminate Hamas, not the Palestinian people.
While an emergency order from the World Court would not be
enforceable, it would represent a major international embarrassment for Israel,
which is increasingly isolated on the world stage.
A
growing number of nations including Brazil, Pakistan, Turkey, Malaysia,
Venezuela, Colombia, Saudi Arabia, Bolivia, Jordan, and Bangladesh are
supporting South Africa's case, as are the Arab League, more than 1,250 international
human rights and civil society group, and progressive US Congresswomen Rashida
Tlaib and Cori Bush.
"Whatever the outcome, we are witnessing an amazing
moment of rule of international law history," said Amnesty
International secretary general Agnès Callamard.
No comments:
Post a Comment