2 hrs 50 min
Israel Makes Oral Arguments Countering South Africa’s Genocide Claims in the ICJ Lawfare No Bull
-
- Government
On Jan. 12, Israel delivered oral arguments rejecting South Africa’s claims of Israeli genocide in Gaza in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In South Africa v. Israel, South Africa alleges that Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza has violated the 1948 Convention Against Genocide. At this stage of the proceedings, South Africa seeks a directive, or “provisional measure,” from the ICJ that would order Israel to stop operations in Gaza on the basis that South Africa’s claims are plausible and that irreparable harm is possible if Israeli operations continue.
Among other arguments, Israel’s representatives contend that the ICJ lacks jurisdiction, as there is no “dispute” over whether Israel has committed genocide; the standards of irreparable harm and urgency required to establish provisional measures are not satisfied, as Israel has taken pains to mitigate civilian harm by asking civilians to leave conflict areas and allowing substantial levels of humanitarian aid to pass into Gaza; and provisional measures halting Israeli operations would violate Israel’s inherent right to self-defense.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
On Jan. 12, Israel delivered oral arguments rejecting South Africa’s claims of Israeli genocide in Gaza in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In South Africa v. Israel, South Africa alleges that Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza has violated the 1948 Convention Against Genocide. At this stage of the proceedings, South Africa seeks a directive, or “provisional measure,” from the ICJ that would order Israel to stop operations in Gaza on the basis that South Africa’s claims are plausible and that irreparable harm is possible if Israeli operations continue.
Among other arguments, Israel’s representatives contend that the ICJ lacks jurisdiction, as there is no “dispute” over whether Israel has committed genocide; the standards of irreparable harm and urgency required to establish provisional measures are not satisfied, as Israel has taken pains to mitigate civilian harm by asking civilians to leave conflict areas and allowing substantial levels of humanitarian aid to pass into Gaza; and provisional measures halting Israeli operations would violate Israel’s inherent right to self-defense.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
2 hrs 50 min