South Africa’s genocide case against Israel
By Dr. James E. Sulton Jr.
JA International Correspondent
On 29 December 2023, the Republic of South Africa filed an application in the Registry of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) instituting proceedings against the State of Israel, alleging violations of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip.
Nearly three months into an Israeli military campaign that had killed more than 21,500 Palestinians, Pretoria characterized Israel’s conduct as “genocidal in nature,” aimed at destroying a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial, and ethnic group. South Africa founded the Court’s jurisdiction on Article IX of the Convention, to which both states are parties.
At public hearings in January 2024, South Africa’s legal team argued Israel committed acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention – mass killing, serious bodily and mental harm, and the deliberate infliction of conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction, including siege, displacement, and the obstruction of humanitarian aid. Crucially, Pretoria pointed to statements by senior Israeli officials as evidence of genocidal intent, the element distinguishing genocide from other crimes. South Africa asked the Court to indicate provisional measures, foremost among them an order that Israel “immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza.”
Israel, breaking with its historical reluctance to appear before international tribunals, chose to participate. It rejected the accusation as baseless, arguing its operations targeted Hamas following the October 7, 2023, attacks, it acted in self-defense consistent with international humanitarian law, and South Africa failed to establish any plausible genocidal intent.
On 26 January 2024, the ICJ delivered its Order. It found that, prima facie, it had jurisdiction under Article IX and South Africa had standing to bring the dispute. Most consequentially, the Court held at least some of the rights asserted by South Africa under the Genocide Convention are plausible, specifically the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide.
The Court declined to order a ceasefire, but it did indicate six provisional measures. By 15 votes to 2, it directed Israel to “take all measures within its power” to prevent the commission of acts under Article II, and to ensure its military committed no such acts. By 16 votes to 1, it ordered Israel to prevent and punish direct and public incitement to genocide and to “take immediate and effective measures” to enable urgently needed humanitarian assistance. It further required the preservation of evidence and the submission of a compliance report within one month. Judge Julia Sebutinde and Judge ad hoc Aharon Barak dissented on several points.
The Court subsequently issued two further orders as conditions deteriorated – on 28 March 2024, ordering expanded humanitarian access, and on 24 May 2024, directing Israel to immediately halt its military offensive in Rafah.
The rulings reverberated globally. Because obligations under the Genocide Convention are owed equally among all parties, a widening coalition of states filed declarations of intervention under Article 63 – including Nicaragua, Colombia, Libya, Mexico, Spain, Ireland, Chile, Bolivia, Turkey, Brazil, Belgium, and the State of Palestine. In March 2026, the Netherlands, Iceland, and Namibia intervened in support of the case, while the United States, Hungary, and Fiji intervened backing Israel’s position.
The proceedings ran parallel to the International Criminal Court’s issuance of arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant in November 2024, obliging over 120 states to detain them.
The merits, however, remain undecided. The provisional measures determine no question of Israel’s ultimate responsibility. The Court fixed extended timetables for written pleadings – reportedly stretching a South African reply to November 2027 and an Israeli rejoinder to 2029 – meaning a definitive judgment on whether genocide occurred lies years away.
