All eyes are on the International Court of Justice, which on Thursday heard South Africa’s case against Israel on charges of committing genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Tomorrow, Israel is expected to present its plea in response to South Africa’s plea.
Regarding South Africa’s plea, Tel Aviv Tribune’s correspondent in The Hague, Muhammad Al-Baqali, indicated that there is great satisfaction at the level of human rights defenders and the rights of the Palestinian people, because the court may take into account the evidence presented, which indicates that Israel is committing the crime of genocide and is violating its obligations under the Convention. That I signed.
Al-Baqali said, “There is an impression that the volume of evidence and the methods in which it was presented at the legal level are very strong and capable of convincing the 15 judges,” and added that “they are referring to the law, not political calculations,” which was confirmed by one of the judges to Tel Aviv Tribune.
According to Tel Aviv Tribune’s correspondent, the presence of 15 judges from different backgrounds, schools and different countries gives a kind of guarantee that the final decision taken by the International Court of Justice will be purely legal without bias.
Knowing that the main and urgent request submitted by South Africa in its plea is to stop the Israeli massacres in the Gaza Strip, and it is assumed – according to the correspondent – that the court will respond to this request soon, and if the court takes a decision ordering Israel to stop the genocide in Gaza, the matter must be done in a manner urgent.
What happens after the court decides?
The correspondent indicates that there is a conviction that the court’s decision will have a very significant impact on Israel and will extend for decades, as is the case with UN Security Council resolutions on the Palestinian issue.
According to what was confirmed by one of the judges within the International Court of Justice, as well as jurists and jurists to Tel Aviv Tribune, if the court’s decision condemned Israel, it would persecute it, and it and its allies would have one of two choices: either accept the implementation of the decision, and commit to stopping the fighting, or delivering aid and avoiding targeting civilians in Gaza, or If the decision is not accepted, the court resorts to the Security Council, which is of course unreliable due to American support for Israel.
But the correspondent says that the decision will have weight once it is issued by the highest international judicial body.
Al-Baqali talked about the difference between the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, both of which are based in The Hague. The former only rules between states, files lawsuits before it in the name of states, and does not issue arrest warrants, while the Criminal Court judges individuals, and has the right to issue arrest warrants against individuals. He accuses the Public Prosecutor of the Criminal Court, Karim Khan, of not advancing the judicial procedures properly and not taking action with Gaza as he did in the case of Ukraine.
If the decision is issued by the International Court of Justice convicting Israel, this will put pressure on the Criminal Court to act “nominally,” that is, announce the names of the Israeli officials who commit crimes in Gaza, and direct summons and trials to them, according to Tel Aviv Tribune’s correspondent.
How will Israel respond?
Regarding the details of the official Israeli position, Tel Aviv Tribune correspondent Walid Al-Omari in Ramallah said that Israel is angry and worried, because it will not be able to brandish the weapon of “anti-Semitism” in the face of what was proposed in the International Court of Justice, and because what is happening in the court is the culmination of the diplomatic, political and media movement. Global.
Al-Omari pointed out that the file presented by the State of South Africa did not limit itself to giving facts on the ground regarding what is happening in the Gaza Strip in word form, but also there was monitoring of the statements of Israeli officials since the beginning of the war, including some calling for dropping a nuclear bomb on Gaza, and others calling for wiping out the Strip. Entire Gaza, occupying it, establishing settlements there, and displacing its population.
Al-Omari said that the Israeli positions were issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which said, “We are facing the largest global display of hypocrisy,” and that “what is happening is an attempt to prosecute the victim.” As for the opposition leader, Yair Lapid, he said that the International Court of Justice “prosecutes the victims, and does not prosecute the perpetrators,” and that Israel should not have gone to this forum, which is the same position echoed by representatives and ministers from the Likud Party.
Al-Omari confirms that the Israelis are concerned, because the case will influence global public opinion and decision-makers, and that the decision reached by the International Court of Justice may be embarrassing for the United States, indicating that Israel will present its plea tomorrow in response to South Africa’s plea.
Al-Omari spoke about information indicating that the Israeli response will be based on three axes. The first is that it will say that it was forced into this war after what it describes as the October 7 massacre. The second will claim that the quotes attached to the complaint filed by South Africa were taken out of context, and that whoever said them They are not decision-makers in Israel, and thirdly, it is fighting the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) for what it committed on October 7th, and is not fighting the Palestinian people.
In the same context, Tel Aviv Tribune’s correspondent in Tel Aviv, Najwan Samri, said that there is a state of anger and very great tension within Israel over any possible decision that may be issued by the International Court of Justice.