South Africa has invoked the Genocide Convention against Israel over Gaza

[HeidiInTheBigCity]

The entire filing is 84 pages long and, frankly, took me several hours to read - it's well worth the effort, though, in that it is rather (painfully at times) clinical and devastating in equal measure: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf

Go, South Africa!

It might not male that much of a difference in the short term - but: to see the former victims of Apartheid take the lead on the world stage, and offer support (the way they - after multiple decades of campaigning and pressure ... it's not as though world leaders hated Apartheid South Africa "by default") is just ... a little spark of light within the darkness!

Many threads on here are echo chambers so, as I said before new people welcome.

Why do people try to drive new people off (if they don't share their views)

Almost all threads on this particular board do tend to polarise in one way or the other and deliberate disruption of like-minded people quietly discussing topics [echo chambers if you wish] is very common by keyboard warrior protagonists from 'both sides'.

Is it really a surprise that rude and/or disruptive posters whether new or old not infrequently get short shrift?

Not suggesting that either of the 'new posters' have done this - perhaps more likely that posting something on Page 26 almost exactly the same as was already explored at length on page 1-4, 7-9, 13-15 isn't going to get an enthusiastic reception? - and more likely a weary 'oh no not this again response'?

But then again some folks like going over the same ground over and over again and others enjoy a good ruck

It's just the same old MN story - RTFT and 'scroll on by' if a poster appears to be being deliberately de-railing/disruptive or is just irritating you

And don't try to police the thread

.

Anyway back on topic

All the front pages are not surprisingly replete with the Houthi retaliation and very little on the Genocide court case. Agree it's 'interesting' timing and wasn't planned on a whim yesterday evening. Thankfully the US warship sinking rumour was just that - a rumour

Would I be correct in thinking that Israel's opening statement will be at 10am [GMT] like SA's was yesterday?

Hopefully there will be the same detailed coverage which can be posted here

It's on right now @Efacsen .

The Hearing has started. I missed the beginning because yesterday I'm sure they said it started at 10am. Anyway they're playing on Al Jazeera if anyone is having trouble playing it on UN tv.

www.aljazeera.com/live

They're saying if there's a case of genocide then it's against Israel.

It's a defence (in his head) I guess? Not a legal argument, it takes brass balls to actually do this in court, does he not realise that it's a court and they won't be swayed by emotional appeals but by actual evidence. Also it's not good form to denigrate your opponent, judges generally look down on that.

Thanks @anotherlevel will try and post here for the PP at work /otherwise engaged

Unless PP are finding it too much?

Disappointed that the Guardian aren't covering it - maybe they've been foxed by the timing too?

Are there any news sites doing written updates on todays hearing? I can't see much, most reporting on the strikes
I won't get a chance to watch it today but was looking to read the updates

Tal Becker is now speaking
The legal adviser of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs is making the opening statements for Israel.

Israel says it is acting in self-defence
Israel says its actions in Gaza are acts of self-defence following Hamas’s attack on October 7.
Israeli air, land and sea attacks since that day have killed more than 23,000 Palestinians in Gaza and wounded over 50,000.
The revised death toll from the October 7 attack in Israel stands at 1,139.

Here is a summary of some of Becker’s arguments so far

• South Africa has put forward a “distorted factual and legal picture”.
• South Africa attempted to weaponise the term genocide against Israel.
• Hamas committed a “wholesale massacre”.
• The case made yesterday “ignored” the events of October 7.

Al Jazeera.

They say going to site the 7/10 footage apparently. I thought the court said no to that? (Someone said this up thread).

I'm not sure what the point is though as genocide is not something that can be legally justified. It's legally irrelevant surely.

Israel to show footage of October 7 attack in today’s hearing

Israel’s legal representatives will show raw footage of Hamas’s October 7 attack during today’s hearing.
Becker says it is important for the court to see some of the footage to give insight into the outbreak of the war in Gaza.
“It is impossible to understand the armed conflict in Gaza without appreciating the nature of the threat that Israel is facing and the brutality and lawlessness of the armed force confronting it,” Becker said.

Yes please efacsen

Policing the thread, whilst telling me not to police the thread. 😂

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-israel-genocide-hague-south-africa-b2477497.html

The independent are covering it

This has a live feed

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-11/ty-article-live/intl-court-of-justice-unlikely-to-order-gaza-cease-fire-israeli-officials-say/0000018c-f711-d432-a7ae-fff9faed0000

Actually 'don't police the thread' is a general well accepted MN advice

But since you're taking personally what can anyone say?

Anyway back on topic - will be ignoring from now on

Okay, is Shaw actually arguing "no jurisdiction because while SA contacted ISR the latter didn't respond, therefore no exchange, therefore no legal standing?

Because that is what I am thinking he might be saying.

In which case, this would be ludicrous; the implication would be that you can get out of anything by refusing to directly engage with anyone who excuses you of it.

I must have this wrong (not a lawyer)?

Thanks all for the links

Israel’s lawyer: Call to end Gaza military operations an ‘unconscionable request’

In his opening remarks, Tal Becker has said calls for provisional measures for Israel to end fighting in Gaza “cannot stand” because it has the right to defend itself.
The lawyer instead said the court should apply provisional measures against South Africa, accusing it of maintaining close ties with Hamas.

Becker blames South Africa for having close relations with Hamas

Here is a quick summary of Becker’s arguments and claims:

• South Africa enjoys close relations with Hamas despite the group being recognised as a terrorist organisation by many countries.
• Hostilities between Israel and Hamas have exacted a terrible toll on Israel and Palestine.
• Hamas has systematically and unlawfully embedded its military operations, fighters and assets throughout Gaza.
• Hamas uses civilian infrastructure and fails to protect its civilians.
• Israel is operating in Gaza to protect civilians.

Becker’s presentation focused on Hamas and its attack

The lawyer has now finished his presentation which mainly focused on Hamas’s October 7 attack, adding that South Africa failed to take that up in its presentation yesterday.
“What Israel is doing is Gaza is not to destroy people but protect people. Its people,” he said. “Israel is in a war of defence against Hamas, not against the Palestinian people.”
Becker called South Africa’s case a “libel” but did not address in detail the genocide claims that South Africa says Israel is carrying out in its war on Gaza which has killed more than 23,000 Palestinians, the majority of them women and children, while also destroying civilian infrastructure, including schools, universities and hospitals.

I can't believe they are trying to discredit SAs approach to deny genocidal intent.

Malcolm Shaw is now handed the floor @HeidiInTheBigCity

The professor of international law is Israel’s next legal representative that has taken the floor.
We will bring you key talking points from his presentation shortly.

The lawyer lost a page, how embarrassing.

Shaw continues Israel’s defence

Shaw, professor of international law at the University of Leicester in the UK, is now laying out a legal defence for Israel against South Africa’s claims of genocide. Here is a summary of what he has said so far:

• The correct context under which to view Israel’s war on Gaza is Hamas’s October 7 attack.
• While Hamas’s attack does not give Israel the right to breach international law, it does mean Israel has the right to defend itself in line with humanitarian law.
• The case against Israel relates only to charges of genocide, which “stands alone among violations of international law as the epitome of evil”. If the charge of genocide is levelled incorrectly, “the essence of this crime would be lost”.

Click here to share on social media