Loops said it was a complaint Genocide Provided by South Africa international justice Court In The Hague v. Israel, it also hopes that the court will order Tel Aviv to take precautionary measures to protect civilians, “but far from it,” as the magazine believes that this will not change Israel’s military policy in GazaShe wondered how to classify what happened in Gaza and how to adapt it legally.
Whatever the ruling, the magazine highlighted – at the beginning – that the government Benjamin Netanyahu It will not change its battle plan one iota, just as Russia did when the same court asked it to “refrain from any action that would aggravate or prolong the conflict.”
South Africa had submitted a complaint to the court, which condemns countries if they do not comply with international treaties, accusing Tel Aviv of violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and here is Israel, which was established by a decision of United nations In 1948, in the wake of the largest genocide in history, she finds herself accused of “the crime of crimes,” according to the formula of Polish-Jewish American law professor Rafael Lemkin, the inventor of this concept in the wake of the Holocaust.
According to the magazine, Israel killed 25,000 people, most of them women and children, and wounded 70,000, forced the displacement of 1.9 million, representing 85% of the population of Gaza, bombed hospitals and schools, and restricted the access of humanitarian aid, which increased the risks of famine and epidemics. Are these crimes? War, crimes against humanity, or genocide?
There are war crimes
To these questions, Lopes responded with what was said – in an interview with Al Jazeera – by Luis Moreno Ocampo, the former public prosecutor. to the International Criminal CourtEstablished in 1998 and responsible for prosecuting individuals, the Gaza Blockade alone constitutes genocide.
The magazine pointed out that the term “genocide” is subject to legal debate because “the intent to deliberately and systematically destroy a population is necessary to prove” in this case, as Serge Sur, professor emeritus of international law, points out.
Sur explained that the humanitarian situation, no matter how terrible and disastrous, is not enough to talk about genocide, but rather the intention and agreement to destroy the group must be proven.
In the context of the Israeli response in Gaza, which is not commensurate with the attack that Israel was subjected to and which does not provide adequate protection for civilians, Sur says, “There is no doubt that there are war crimes, but the fact of turning Gaza into an uninhabitable place, or displacing the population without ensuring their security, may It amounts to crimes against humanity, and it does not seem to me that genocide has been proven in advance, due to the lack of evidence of an organized and systematic plan for destruction.”
The 84-page South African document highlighted, among other things, comments by some Israeli leaders, such as Netanyahu's reference to the destruction of “Amalek” and to “absolute evil.” The Minister of Defense described Yoav Galant The Palestinians are “human animals” who must be besieged, “no electricity, no water, no gas, everything is closed.”
In a sign that Israel is not taking this complaint lightly, it sent its best lawyers to the first hearings on January 11 and 12, and proposed Aharon Barak, a Holocaust survivor and former president of the Supreme Court, as a judge to represent it – in the court’s lineup, which includes 15 Judge – In addition to a judge representing South Africa, Tal Becker, advisor to the Israeli Foreign Minister, said, “If there were acts of genocide, they were committed against Israel.”
The International Court of Justice is expected to rule tomorrow on interim measures in which Pretoria demands Tel Aviv stop “the killing and causing serious mental and physical injury to the Palestinian people in Gaza, and the imposition of living conditions that could lead to their material destruction.”
As for the court’s final decision – according to the magazine – it is not expected to take at least two years before it can declare its jurisdiction in this matter, and another two years to rule on the possibility of committing the crime of genocide.
In this case, it is difficult to carry out investigations in Gaza, which is closed to international observers, especially since lawyers cannot go to the site yet, let alone collect possible evidence of crimes, in addition to the fact that Israel has not signed the International Criminal Court Convention, and therefore can refuse entry. investigators to its territory as well as interrogate its soldiers.
Director of the Nanterre Center for International Law, Pierre Bodot-Levinc, says, “The court’s decisions are final and legally binding, but it does not have the authority to implement them. However, the impact will be very large, at the symbolic and legal level, on Israel’s position in the diplomatic and communications battle.”