Israel has rejected the accusations introduced by South Africa to the Worldwide Courtroom of Justice (ICJ) that its actions in Gaza quantity to genocide, in a second day of a public listening to on the world physique in The Hague.
Israel’s authorized representatives on Friday claimed South Africa’s case was “unfounded”, “absurd” and amounting to “libel”, and mentioned Israel sought to not destroy a individuals however to guard its individuals.
On Thursday, on the first day of hearings, South Africa argued Israel had dedicated “systematic” acts of genocide in Gaza, the place greater than 23,500 Palestinians have been killed amid Israel’s army marketing campaign, with at the very least 70 p.c of whom had been girls and youngsters, in line with Gaza’s Well being Ministry.
Israel’s arguments revolved round its “proper to self-defence” following the assaults by Hamas on October 7, in addition to what it referred to as an absence of proof of “genocidal intent”.
Christopher Staker, a lawyer representing Israel, mentioned, “The inevitable fatalities and human struggling of any battle will not be of itself a sample of conduct that plausibly exhibits genocidal intent.”
Malcolm Shaw, a professor of worldwide regulation representing Israel, mentioned the case relates solely to fees of genocide, which “stands alone amongst violations of worldwide regulation because the epitome of evil”. If the cost of genocide is levelled incorrectly, “the essence of this crime could be misplaced”, he mentioned.
Shaw added that such proof was missing within the arguments South Africa offered a day earlier.
Detailing its proof on Thursday, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, a lawyer for South Africa, mentioned, “The proof of genocidal intent will not be solely chilling, it is usually overwhelming and incontrovertible.”
‘Huge disconnect’
Israel’s authorized representatives insisted its military has acted in compliance with worldwide regulation in Gaza and aimed to mitigate civilian hurt by warning of impending army actions, together with by way of phone calls and leafleting.
Omri Sender, one other lawyer, argued that Israel’s efforts to facilitate humanitarian help to individuals in Gaza testified to its goal of defending the civilian inhabitants, somewhat than destroying it.
Nevertheless, Thomas MacManus, a senior lecturer in state crime at Queen Mary College of London, informed Al Jazeera the ICJ is more likely to see a “large disconnect” between the image Israel painted of its humanitarian concern for Gaza and “the fact on the bottom the place UN companies say persons are ravenous, missing water, and seeing assaults on hospitals, faculties, and universities”.
Talking earlier than the ICJ listening to, Galit Raguan, appearing director of the worldwide justice division at Israel’s Ministry of Justice, refuted the declare that Israel had bombed hospitals. She argued Israel had discovered proof of Hamas utilizing “each single hospital in Gaza” for army functions.
Responding to claims that hospitals had been used as army bases, Palestinian international ministry official Ammar Hijazi informed Al Jazeera exterior The Hague that Israel’s arguments weren’t based mostly the truth is or regulation.
“What Israel has offered at the moment are lots of the already debunked lies,” he mentioned.
‘Believable proper to self-defence’
The ICJ is about to rule on 9 provisional measures successfully searching for the suspension of army operations in Gaza, however a timeline for when that can occur has not been acknowledged. Israel has argued the provisional measures can’t require a state to chorus from exercising a “believable proper to defend itself”.
On the difficulty of jurisdiction, Israel argued that one of many necessities of the ICJ’s mandate is that the state placing ahead the case ought to attempt to kind out this drawback first. In line with Israel, they didn’t handle to speak to South Africa earlier than they introduced this case to the court docket. In flip, South Africa argued it had reached out to Israel however obtained no response.
The Israeli staff did make robust “jurisdictional and procedural arguments”, Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst Marwan Bishara mentioned, however he added that “Israel misplaced the ethical, factual, historic and humanitarian argument due to the way in which the scenario has unravelled in Gaza – with the sheer dying and industrial killing there.”
Tal Becker, the authorized adviser of Israel’s international ministry, informed the ICJ listening to that South Africa loved shut relations with Hamas and was due to this fact trying to place ahead a “distorted factual and authorized image”.
South Africa “firmly rejects” that declare, Al Jazeera’s Fahmida Miller mentioned, reporting from South Africa.
“The South African authorities has mentioned that it doesn’t have bilateral relations with Hamas and that its stance when it comes to supporting the Palestinian wrestle in opposition to occupation doesn’t equate to the assist of Hamas,” she mentioned.
In its presentation on Thursday, South Africa’s legal professionals additionally condemned Hamas’s actions on October 7.
ICJ President Joan Donoghue ended the two-day listening to saying the court docket will announce its determination within the coming days.
