Israel Rejects South Africa’s Genocide Claims at ICJ

Israel defended itself against genocide allegations presented by South Africa at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) during a heated two-day hearing. Israel argued that any genocidal acts had been perpetrated against them, presenting evidence of alleged atrocities committed by Hamas militants. Tal Becker, representing Israel, emphasized that the actions were within the bounds of defending citizens and territory, rejecting South Africa’s portrayal as a “distorted” and “manipulative” description of reality. Israel accused South Africa of “weaponizing” the term genocide, urging the court to dismiss the accusation. The ICJ panel will now decide on South Africa’s request for emergency measures, potentially leading to an order for Israel to halt military operations in Gaza. A final ruling on the genocide allegations could take years.

Becker argued that Hamas’ acts on October 7 were genocidal, citing evidence of the group’s leaders expressing an “agenda of annihilation.” He highlighted the repeated use of “annihilationist language” in Hamas’ charter and statements by its leaders.
“The annihilationist language of Hamas’ charter is repeated regularly by its leaders, with the goal, in the words of one member of Hamas’ political bureau, of ‘the cleansing of Palestine of the filth of the Jews,'” Becker said. Becker asserted that the provisional measures requested by South Africa, such as the suspension of Israel’s military operations, would hinder Israel’s ability to defend its citizens.

Israel accused South Africa of presenting a “profoundly distorted factual and legal picture,” claiming that the entire case relied on a “deliberately curated, decontextualized, and manipulative description of the reality of current hostilities.”
Becker emphasised Israel’s awareness of the historical context of the genocide convention, stating, “Seared in our collective memory is the systematic murder of six million Jews.” He argued that the convention should not be invoked in the current case, as it was not designed to address the impact of hostilities on the civilian population but rather “a malevolent crime of the most exceptional severity.” South Africa had previously argued that Israel’s leaders were “intent on destroying the Palestinians in Gaza” and called for a halt to the military campaign. Israel dismissed the accusation as “blood libel” and accused South Africa of functioning as the “legal arm of Hamas.”
Israeli President Isaac Herzog too reiterated the country’s stance, emphasising its commitment to self-defence and efforts to minimise civilian casualties under challenging circumstances.
In the coming days, the ICJ’s panel of judges will decide whether to grant South Africa’s request for “emergency measures,” potentially leading to an order for Israel to halt its military operations in Gaza. The international community now awaits the court’s decision on the emergency measures.