International Court of Justice Cases: South Africa v. Israel, Nicaragua v. Germany
Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip. Alleged Breaches of Certain Intl. Obligations in Respect of Occupied Palestinian Territory.
After speaking with friends and family around the world, it seems that most people I know are oblivious to these ongoing cases at the ICJ. There is barely any legacy media coverage. Instead we have the deafening war machine feeding the insatiable ravenous hunger of the military industrial complex and its weapons contractors, further enabled by unhinged politicians and genocidal misleaders.
The International Court of Justice, which has its seat in The Hague,
is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. Pictured:
I invite you, the reader, to take some time out from the propagandising legacy media, to really read and absorb the meaning and implications behind these words - what is actually being documented at the International Court of Justice; the crime of genocide in the Gaza strip. Here are excerpts from ongoing cases, decisions, and press releases.
South Africa v. Israel
Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Nicaragua requests permission to intervene in the proceedings under Article 62 of the Statute.
Nicaragua considers that the conduct of Israel is in “violation of its obligations under the Genocide Convention, including Articles I, III, IV, V and VI, read in conjunction with Article II”. Therefore, Nicaragua requests the Court to adjudge and declare:
“(1) that the Republic of South Africa and the State of Israel each have a duty to act in accordance with their obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to the members of the Palestinian group, to take all reasonable measures within their power to prevent genocide; and
(2) that the State of Israel:
(a) has breached and continues to breach its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in particular the obligations provided under Article I, read in conjunction with Article II, and Articles III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d), III (e), IV, V and VI;
(b) must cease forthwith any acts and measures in breach of those obligations, including such acts or measures which would be capable of killing or continuing to kill
- 2 -
Palestinians, or causing or continuing to cause serious bodily or mental harm to Palestinians or deliberately inflicting on their group, or continuing to inflict on their group, conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and fully respect its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in particular the obligations provided under Articles I, III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d), III (e), IV, V and VI;
(c) must ensure that persons committing genocide, conspiring to commit genocide, directly and publicly inciting genocide, attempting to commit genocide and complicit in genocide contrary to Articles I, III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d) and III (e) are punished by a competent national or international tribunal, as required by Articles I, IV, V and VI;
(d) to that end and in furtherance of those obligations arising under Articles I, IV, V and VI, must collect and conserve evidence and ensure, allow and/or not inhibit directly or indirectly the collection and conservation of evidence of genocidal acts committed against Palestinians in Gaza, including such members of the group displaced from Gaza;
(e) must perform the obligations of reparation in the interest of Palestinian victims, including but not limited to allowing the safe and dignified return of forcibly displaced and/or abducted Palestinians to their homes, respect for their full human rights and protection against further discrimination, persecution, and other related acts, and provide for the reconstruction of what it has destroyed in Gaza, consistent with the obligation to prevent genocide under Article I; and
(f) must offer assurances and guarantees of non-repetition of violations of the Genocide Convention, in particular the obligations provided under Articles I, III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d), III (e), IV, V and VI.”
As the basis of jurisdiction between Nicaragua and the Parties to the present proceedings, Nicaragua invokes Article IX of the Genocide Convention.
6. NGOs operating on the ground, such as the Norwegian Refugee Council and Save the Children, have also raised the alarm that "[n]o war can be allowed in a gigantic refugee camp". Warning of a "bloodbath", they have emphasised that "[e]xpanded hostilities in Rafah could collapse the humanitarian response", and that "what happens next" would "be beyond our worst nightmares".
7. The Republic of South Africa is gravely concerned that the unprecedented military offensive against Rafah, as announced by the State of Israel, has already led to and will result in further largescale killing, harm and destruction in serious and irreparable breach both of the Genocide Convention and of the Court's Order of 26 January 2024. Accordingly, and having regard to the situation of extreme emergency, the Republic of South Africa respectfully requests that the Court exceptionally consider exercising its power under Article 75(1) of the Rules of Court. Article 75(1) provides that:
"The Court may at any time decide to examine proprio motu whether the circumstances of the case require the indication of provisional measures which ought to be taken or complied with by any or all of the parties."
8. The Court retains full discretion to exercise this power in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel), without any hearing or submissions by parties, and should do so, pursuant to the precedent case of LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America), given the extreme urgency of the situation and the imminent risk of harm. As stated by the Court in LaGrand, the Court "may, in the event of extreme urgency, proceed without holding oral hearings" to order provisional measures,26 and "it is for the Court to decide in each case if, in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, it should make use of the said power"?'
9. In LaGrand, the Court exercised its Article 75(1) power in a situation of extreme urgency affecting one individual. Here there is a situation of extreme urgency affecting an estimated 1.4 million vulnerable Palestinians in Rafah, at least half of them children. They are at serious risk of irreparable harm to their right to be protected from acts of genocide contrary to Articles II and II of the Genocide Convention, by a State which has already been found by this Court to be acting in plausible breach of its obligations under that Convention.
THE HAGUE, 16 February 2024. In the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel), the Court, having duly considered South Africa’s letter dated 12 February 2024 and Israel’s observations thereon received on 15 February 2024, took the following decision, which was communicated to the Parties today by a letter from the Registrar:
“The Court notes that the most recent developments in the Gaza Strip, and in Rafah in particular, ‘would exponentially increase what is already a humanitarian nightmare with untold regional consequences’, as stated by the United Nations Secretary-General (Remarks to the General Assembly on priorities for 2024 (7 Feb. 2024)).
This perilous situation demands immediate and effective implementation of the provisional measures indicated by the Court in its Order of 26 January 2024, which are applicable throughout the Gaza Strip, including in Rafah, and does not demand the indication of additional provisional measures.
The Court emphasizes that the State of Israel remains bound to fully comply with its obligations under the Genocide Convention and with the said Order, including by ensuring the safety and security of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”
In its new request, South Africa states that it is “compelled to return to the Court in light of the new facts and changes in the situation in Gaza — particularly the situation of widespread starvation — brought about by the continuing egregious breaches of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide . . . by the State of Israel . . . and its ongoing manifest violations of the provisional measures indicated by this Court on 26 January 2024”. It requests the Court to indicate further provisional measures and/or to modify the provisional measures indicated it its Order of 26 January 2024, pursuant to Article 41 of the Statute of the Court and Article 75, paragraphs 1 and 3, and Article 76, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Court, respectively, “in order urgently to ensure the safety and security of 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza, including over a million children”. It urges the Court to do so without holding a hearing, in light of the “extreme urgency of the situation”.
NEW FACTS AND CHANGES IN THE SITUATION IN GAZA
6. In granting provisional measures, the Court determined that “[a]t present” — on 26 January 2024 — “many Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating”. In making that finding, the Court took notice of statements by United Nations and other humanitarian chiefs, to the effect that: people in Gaza were “facing the highest levels of food insecurity ever recorded” and that “famine [was] around the corner.” They had regard to the fact that “[a]n unprecedented 93% of the population in Gaza [was] facing crisis levels of hunger, with insufficient food and high levels of malnutrition”, with “[a]t least 1 in 4 households . . .facing ‘catastrophic conditions’”, “experiencing an extreme lack of food and starvation and having resorted to selling off their possessions and other extreme measures to afford a simple meal”, and that “[s]tarvation, destitution and death [were] evident.”
As noted by the Court, “the view of South Africa”, based on the facts presented in its Application, was that Palestinians in Gaza were at “immediate risk of death by starvation, dehydration and disease as a result of the ongoing siege by Israel, the destruction of Palestinian towns, the insufficient aid being allowed through to the Palestinian population and the impossibility of distributing this limited aid while bombs fall.”
7. Palestinians in Gaza are no longer at “immediate risk of death by starvation.” At least 15 Palestinian children — including babies — in Gaza have already died of starvation in the past week alone, with the actual numbers believed to be much higher. These deaths are “man-made, predictable and entirely preventable.” It is predicted that they will increase exponentially and not linearly in the absence of a cessation of military activities and a lifting of the blockade. Palestinian children are starving to death as a direct result of the deliberate acts and omissions of Israel — in violation of the Genocide Convention and of the Court’s Order. This includes Israel’s deliberate attempts to cripple the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (‘UNRWA’), on whom the vast majority of besieged, displaced and starving Palestinian men, women, children and babies depend for their survival.
9. Israel has repeatedly used humanitarian aid as a “bargaining chip in negotiations” through its creation of a hostile, inoperable environment for aid agencies. This includes: blocking such aid through obstructions, restrictions and denials; closed crossings; deliberately killing and targeting humanitarian workers; its destruction of Palestinian crops and arable land; its killing of Palestinian livestock; its cutting off the North of Gaza — in particular — from sufficient aid deliveries; its reducing Palestinian men, women and children to eating animal feed, bird seed and leaves, unfit for human consumption; and its pattern of attacks on desperate Palestinians as they try to obtain aid from humanitarian convoys, discussed in more detail below. Humanitarian chiefs’ “[w]orst famine fears” have been “realised”. As stated by Medical Aid for Palestinians, “[t]his is the fastest decline in a population's nutrition status ever recorded. That means children are being starved at the fastest rate the world has ever seen.”
10. On 3 March 2023, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food warned that “famine may very well be already occurring” due to Israel intentionally starving the Palestinian people in Gaza”, and that “the only way to end/prevent this famine is an immediate ceasefire. And the only way to get a ceasefire is to sanction Israel.” On 4 March 2024, the Director-General of the World Health Organization joined calls for a ceasefire following “grim findings” by its visiting staff of “severe levels of malnutrition, children dying of starvation, serious shortages of fuel, food and medical supplies, hospital buildings destroyed” at two hospitals in Northern Gaza.
11. Israel is now massacring desperate, starving Palestinians seeking to obtain food for their slowly dying children. The so-called ‘flour massacre’ of 29 February 2024 — in which 118 Palestinians were killed and a further 760 injured — was the largest such massacre to date. However, it forms part of an escalating pattern of fatal attacks by Israel on the Palestinian people it is deliberately starving, as they seek to access aid. This has led a group of United Nations human rights experts to issue a stark warning that “Israel is not respecting its international legal obligations, is not complying with the provisional measures of the International Court of Justice, and is committing atrocity crimes.”
12. The horrific deaths from starvation of Palestinian children, including babies, brought about by Israel’s deliberate acts and omissions in violation of the Genocide Convention and of the Court’s Order — including Israel’s concerted attempts since 26 January 2024 to ensure the defunding of UNRWA and Israel’s attacks on starving Palestinians seeking to access what extremely limited humanitarian assistance Israel permits into Northern Gaza, in particular — constitute a violation of Articles II(a) and
(c) of the Genocide Convention, and a breach of Provisional Measures 1, 2 and 4 of the Court’s Order.
They also constitute a change in the situation in Gaza for the purposes of Article 76(2) of the Rules of Court and constitute new facts for the purposes of Article 75(3). Faced with a State willingly starving people in open defiance of this Court’s order, they justify — and indeed demand — the urgent indication of additional provisional measures and/or the modification of the Court’s previous decisions concerning provisional measures. As reported by the United Nations Children’s Fund (‘UNICEF’):
“Now, the child deaths we feared are here and are likely to rapidly increase unless the war ends and obstacles to humanitarian relief are immediately resolved... The sense of helplessness and despair among parents and doctors in realizing that lifesaving aid, just a few kilometres away, is being kept out of reach, must be as unbearable, but worse still are the anguished cries of those babies slowly perishing under the world’s gaze. The lives of thousands more babies and children depend on urgent action being taken now.”
13. “Life is draining out of Gaza at alarming speed.” As stated by UNRWA, “these deaths are man-made, predictable and entirely preventable. Gaza has become hell on earth. When will the world say “enough”?
Present: President SALAM; Vice-President SEBUTINDE; Judges TOMKA, ABRAHAM, XUE, IWASAWA, NOLTE, CHARLESWORTH, BRANT, CLEVELAND, TLADI; Judge ad hoc BARAK; Registrar GAUTIER.
The International Court of Justice,
Composed as above,
After deliberation,
Having regard to Article 48 of the Statute of the Court and to Articles 31, 44, 45, paragraph 1, and 48 of the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Application filed in the Registry of the Court on 29 December 2023, whereby the Republic of South Africa (hereinafter “South Africa”) instituted proceedings against the State of Israel (hereinafter “Israel”) concerning alleged violations in the Gaza Strip of obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;
Whereas, on 29 February 2024, a meeting was held by the President of the Court with the representatives of the Parties pursuant to Article 31 of the Rules of Court, in order to ascertain their views with regard to the time-limits for the filing of the initial written pleadings in the case;
- 2 -
Whereas, at this meeting, the Agent of South Africa indicated that his Government’s preference would be to have at its disposal a period of 12 months for the preparation of its Memorial from the date of the Order of 26 January 2024 indicating provisional measures, but that it would “place itself in the hands of the Court” regarding the matter; and whereas the Deputy Agent of Israel stated that, in the view of her Government, a period of six months would be appropriate for the preparation by each Party of its initial written pleading;
Taking into account the views expressed by the Parties, and considering that each Party should be given a period of nine months for the preparation of its respective pleading, with the first time period to be calculated as from 26 January 2024,
Fixes the following time-limits for the filing of the written pleadings:
28 October 2024 for the Memorial of the Republic of South Africa;
28 July 2025 for the Counter-Memorial of the State of Israel; and
Reserves the subsequent procedure for further decision.
Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative, at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this fifth day of April, two thousand and twenty-four, in three copies, one of which will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the Government of the State of Israel, respectively.
(Signed) Nawaf SALAM,
President.
(Signed) Philippe GAUTIER,
Registrar.
___________
Nicaragua v. Germany
1. On 1 March 2024, the Republic of Nicaragua (hereinafter “Nicaragua”) filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against the Federal Republic of Germany (hereinafter “Germany”) concerning alleged breaches of certain international obligations in respect of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
2. At the end of its Application, Nicaragua “respectfully requests the Court to adjudge and declare that Germany:
(1) has breached and continues to breach its obligations under the Genocide Convention in particular the obligations provided in Article I by, with full knowledge of the situation, failing to prevent the ongoing genocide against the Palestinian People in particular Gazans;
(2) has breached and continues to breach its obligations under the Genocide Convention in particular the obligations provided in Article I by not only failing to prevent the ongoing genocide but by providing aid, including military equipment, to Israel that would be used in the commission of genocide, by Israel, and by withdrawing the financial assistance to the victims provided by UNRWA;
(3) has breached and continues to breach its obligations under Article I of the Fourth Geneva Convention and intransgressible principles of humanitarian law, not only by failing to ensure that the requirements of that Convention are complied with, but also by providing aid, including military equipment, that would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, attacks directed against civilian objects or civilians protected as such, or other war crimes, in violation of its duties under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and customary international law and by withdrawing Germany’s financial assistance to UNRWA;
(4) has breached and continues to breach its obligations under international humanitarian law not only by failing to ensure that these rules of elementary consideration of humanity are respected by Israel, but also by providing aid and assistance to Israel, and withdrawing Germany’s financial assistance to UNRWA;
(5) has breached and continues to breach its conventional and customary law obligations, including the obligation to facilitate and cooperate in bringing about the Palestinian People’s right to self-determination, by providing aid and particularly military equipment to Israel that is used to deny this right of self-determination and moreover helps to maintain and impose an apartheid regime;
(6) has breached and continues to breach international law by refusing to prosecute, bring to trial and punish persons responsible for, or accused of grave crimes under international law, including war crimes and apartheid, whether or not such persons are German nationals;
(7) must cease immediately the breaches of its international obligations indicated above;
(8) must give assurances of non-repetition of the breaches of its obligations indicated above;
(9) must make full reparation for the injury caused by its internationally wrongful acts.”
5. At the end of its Request, Nicaragua asks the Court to indicate the following provisional measures:
“(1) Germany shall immediately suspend its aid to Israel, in particular its military assistance including military equipment, in so far as this aid may be used in the violation of the Genocide Convention, international humanitarian law or other peremptory norms of general international law such as the Palestinian People’s right to self-determination and to not be subject to a regime of apartheid;
(2) Germany must immediately make every effort to ensure that weapons already delivered to Israel are not used to commit genocide, contribute to acts of genocide or are used in such a way as to violate international humanitarian law;
(3) Germany must immediately do everything possible to comply with its obligations under humanitarian law;
(4) Germany must reverse its decision to suspend the funding of UNRWA as part of the compliance of its obligations to prevent genocide and acts of genocide and the violation of the humanitarian rights of the Palestinian People which also includes the obligation to do everything possible to ensure that humanitarian aid reaches the Palestinian People, more particularly in Gaza;
(5) Germany must cooperate to bring to an end the serious breaches of peremptory norms of international law by ceasing its support, including its supply of military equipment to Israel that may be used to commit serious crimes of international law and that it continue the support of the UNRWA on which this Organization has counted and based its activities.”
15. In response, Germany first states that it has fulfilled the obligation incumbent on States parties to the Genocide Convention to prevent the occurrence of genocide by continuously using all reasonable means at its disposal to exert its influence on Israel in order to improve the situation in Gaza and to furnish humanitarian aid to the population of Gaza. Secondly, it contends that the obligation that could be derived from common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions incumbent upon non-parties to an armed conflict does not obligate a State to refrain completely from providing military support to a State involved in an armed conflict.
It rather requires States supplying arms to an area of armed conflict, before taking decisions regarding exports of military equipment and arms, to conduct a proper risk assessment as to whether such arms will be used to commit breaches of obligations under applicable rules of international law. Germany further contends that it has stringent licensing standards to assess whether there is any risk of serious violations of the Genocide Convention, international humanitarian law and other peremptory norms of international law by the recipient State. According to Germany, there is no evidence that the supply of military equipment to Israel by Germany would have contributed to an alleged genocide or to breaches of international humanitarian law.
* *
16. The Court notes that Germany, as it has stated, is bound by the Arms Trade Treaty of 2 April 2013 and by the European Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP of 8 December 2008 (as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1560, published on 17 September 2019), which defines common rules governing the control of exports of military technology and equipment.
17. The Court further notes that, as Germany has also stated, the German legal framework on the manufacturing, marketing and export of weapons and other military equipment involves an inter-agency process with consideration by at least two ministries, and potentially other ministries depending on the content of the licence application. Under this legal framework, there are two categories of military technology and equipment subject to licensing, “war weapons” and “other military equipment”.
The export of “war weapons”, which include combat aircraft, tanks, automatic weapons and certain corresponding ammunition and essential components, requires two licences. The export of “other military equipment”, which includes defence equipment against chemical hazards, protective gear such as helmets or body protection plates, as well as communication equipment, requires one licence. Under the German legal framework, for every licence that is granted, an assessment is carried out by the German Government to ascertain whether there is a clear risk that the particular item subject to licensing would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity or grave breaches of the four Geneva Conventions.
18. The Court in addition notes that, as stated by Germany, there has been a significant decrease since November 2023 in the value of material for which the licences were granted, from approximately €200 million in October 2023 to approximately €24 million in November 2023 to approximately €1 million in March 2024. The Court also notes that, since 7 October 2023, according to Germany, only four licences for “war weapons” have been granted: two for training ammunition, one for propellant charges for test purposes, and one concerned the export of 3,000 portable anti-tank weapons. The Court further notes that Israel had also approached the German Government in 2023 for tank ammunition and that no decision by the Respondent has thus far been made regarding this request. In addition, according to Germany, the licensing for export of a submarine to Israel is currently pending, as only one of the two licences required for this export has so far been granted. Finally, the Court takes note of Germany’s statement that 98 per cent of the licences granted since 7 October 2023 concerned “other military equipment” and not “war weapons”.
19. With regard to Nicaragua’s request that Germany “resume its support and financing of UNRWA in respect of its operations in Gaza” (see paragraph 11 above), the Court notes that Germany announced its decision to suspend its contribution to UNRWA on 27 January 2024 in respect of operations in Gaza. In this regard, the Court observes, first, that contributions to UNRWA are voluntary in nature. Secondly, it notes that, according to the information provided to it by Germany, no new payment was due from the latter in the weeks following the announcement of its decision. Finally, the Court notes that Germany stated that it has supported initiatives aimed at funding the agency’s work, in particular through the payment of €50 million by the European Union to UNRWA on 1 March 2024, as well as providing financial and material support to other organizations operating in the Gaza Strip.
20. Based on the factual information and legal arguments presented by the Parties, the Court concludes that, at present, the circumstances are not such as to require the exercise of its power under Article 41 of the Statute to indicate provisional measures.
“Life is draining out of Gaza at alarming speed.” As stated by UNRWA, “these deaths are man-made, predictable and entirely preventable. Gaza has become hell on earth. When will the world say “enough”?
Nicholas Creed is a Bangkok based writer. All content is free for all readers, with nothing locked in archive that requires a paid subscription.
I'm going to cite a recent Babylon Bee headline: "Israel Warns Civilians To Evacuate Rafah In Most Incompetent Genocide Ever."
Since 2005, when Israel withdrew from Gaza (a "self-governing Palestinian territory," according to Wikipedia) and turned the place over to Gazans, the number one killer of Gazans has been the Gazan government.
South Africa is a Stool Pidgeon of the Marxists in BRICS Russia and China who used The International Court of Justice, which has its seat in The Hague, who claims to be the principal judicial organ organ of the [Freemason Lucifarians] of the United Nations.
The unpalatable fact too, United Nations is a Luciferian Organization. There is no doubt about it.
I am from South Africa and if you want to see Genocide in action by South Africa look no further than at the Afrikaner who is having their culture, history, right to mother tongue education, schools language destroyed, as well as employment opportunities.
The ANC has used 30 years of BBBEE and Affirmative Action all political tools to carve them (a minority) out of the economy.
The dominant Afrikaner Farming community that is being subjected to terrorism (FARM Murders) on a daily basis before 1994 and after that right up today. This by the very same ANC Marxist communist inspired devils within the party. It is wall to wall with communists and socialists who are far worse than Israel who has a right to attack the very enemy HAMAS that they created who went rogue.
The militant Hamas emerged as the winner of the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary elections. In 2007, Hamas took control of Gaza after heavy fighting and violence against the Fatah movement, a nationalist and social democratic party that is among those that make up the PLO.
Mahmoud Abbas, was last elected 19 years ago to a four-year term, and that the last time the Palestinians went to the polls, in 2006, they voted for Hamas.
Hamas is the elected government of Gaza, and has been so since the Israelis in 2005 voluntarily ended their occupation of what was even then a launching pad for unprovoked terrorist attacks on Jewish population centres .
There is no genocide in GAZA, its a made up by the Media Circus and HAMAS and is the direct cause of the misery for the people stranded in GAZA. It is unfortunate that the innocent suffer as HAMAS use them as shields. Proven and shown. They with the help of IRAN decided to attack Israeli on October 7. So, they must be held accountable. There is no International Justice, its a kangaroo court of actors dressed up as clowns.
Where is the justice for the 1200 attacked by Hamas on October 7 as well as those innocent people still being held as hostages by HAMAS?
The casualty numbers in GAZA are faked by the Hamas controlled GAZA Heath Ministry and that has been proven mathematically by a number of individuals who are well qualified to do so. I repeat for the blind Hamas is the elected government of Gaza and they are responsible for their decisions and actions whether or not that you accept it. It is an undeniable fact.