ICJ - Global pulse News
  • What does the ICJ’s judgment on Israel’s Rafah offensive suggest?

    What does the ICJ’s judgment on Israel’s Rafah offensive suggest?

    The UN’s leading court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), provided a judgment recently on Israel’s military offensive in Rafah.

    It was the most recent declaration by the court in a case brought by South Africa, which implicates Israel of a genocide in the Gaza Strip. Israel has actually emphatically rejected the accusation.

    Because the case started, the court has actually provided a series of objected to judgments.

    The 2 essential issue whether the court has actually recommended there is a danger of genocide in Gaza. The 2nd judgment – provided on 24 Might – consists of fiercely challenged phrasing over the military operations in Rafah.

    It is now being intensively scrutinised and argued over.

    In recently’s order, the court ruled by 13 votes to 2 that Israel must: “Right away stop its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which might cause on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that might produce its physical damage in entire or in part.”

    Headings recommended this was an order to stop all military operations in Rafah – however a few of the judges disagree with what it implies.

    5 of the 15 released their own views. 3 had actually supported the order and 2 had actually opposed it.

    Judge Bogdan Aurescu from Romania stated he elected the order, however exposed that he believed the court was being “uncertain” and highlighted that it might not prohibit Israel from taking genuine action in self-defence.

    Judge Alarming Tladi, from South Africa, disagreed with Aurescu, although they had actually elected the very same order. He stated it informed Israel “in specific terms” to stop its offensive in Rafah.

    The 2 judges who had actually opposed the order stated that whatever the others had actually enacted favour of, it was definitely not a need for Israel to start a unilateral ceasefire in Rafah.

    Uganda’s Julia Sebutinde stated the court might not “micromanage” a war and Israel’s Aharon Barak, temporarily-appointed for the case, stated the ICJ’s order was “certified” so long as the nation followed the Genocide Convention.

    The summary from Germany’s judge, Georg Nolte, is the most revealing to where the court discovers itself.

    The order, as he elected it, prohibited military action “as far as it might threaten the rights of the Palestinian individuals” to be safeguarded from a danger of genocide. However he worried: “The court can play just a minimal function in fixing the scenario. It needs to beware not to exceed the limitations of what it can and must do.”

  • South Africa seeks halt to Israel’s Gaza offensive

    South Africa seeks halt to Israel’s Gaza offensive

    South Africa is asking the UN’s top court to order Israel to stop its military offensive in Rafah in southern Gaza.

    It is presenting its case at a two-day hearing at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague. Israel is to deliver its response at the court on Friday.

    South Africa is also seeking to force Israel to allow “unimpeded access” to Gaza for aid workers, journalists and investigators.

    The court is already considering a case brought by South Africa in January accusing Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza. Israel rejected the claim as false and “grossly distorted”.

    Israel began its attack on Hamas in Rafah 10 days ago, amid warnings from the UN and others of a grave risk to civilians. More than a million displaced people had been taking refuge in Rafah and nearly 600,000 have fled from there since the start of the operation.

    South Africa’s application to the court accuses Israel of carrying out “genocidal” operations in Rafah and elsewhere in Gaza, and says that it “must be ordered to stop”.

    Addressing the court at the start of the hearing, South African barrister Vaughan Lowe KC said that “evidence of appalling crimes and atrocities is literally being destroyed and bulldozed, in effect wiping the slate clean for those who’ve committed these crimes and making a mockery of justice”.

    Israel says its offensive in Rafah is necessary in order to destroy the last remaining Hamas battalions which are based there and to rescue some 130 remaining Israeli hostages which it believes are being held there.

    In January, in a highly charged case which was closely watched around the world, the ICJ ordered Israel to take measures to prevent potentially genocidal acts in Gaza. It also ordered Israel to do more to enable the provision of aid to the people there.

    The then president of the court, Joan Donoghue, told the BBC last month that the ICJ did not decide that there was a plausible case for genocide, but rather that the Palestinians had a right to be protected from genocide, as claimed by South Africa.

    The ICJ is not expected to deliver a ruling on the genocide case for several years. Its rulings are legally binding, but in practice unenforceable by the court.

    The latest application is the third which South Africa, whose governing party has a long history of solidarity with the Palestinian cause, has filed with the ICJ against Israel’s actions in Gaza.

    Israel began its offensive in Gaza after gunmen from the ruling Palestinian group Hamas launched an unprecedented attack on Israel on 7 October, killing about 1,200 people and taking 252 others hostage.

    More than 35,270 people have been killed by Israel in the war in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.

    Source link