ICJ ruling on genocide may have little impact on war in Gaza

World court verdict is on finer point of law; judges do not direct Israel to stop bombing

- Jonathan Eyal

LONDON The International Court of Justice’s ICJ) ruling on accusations that Israel is engaged in state-led genocide” in its military operations against Hamas in Gaza amounts to a legal triumph for South Africa, which brought the case before the world court.

But the decisive victory” claimed by South Africa is on a finer point of international law and may have little practical impact on the conduct of the Gaza war.

The court’s panel of 17 judges decided by substantial majorities that the risk of genocide as the act of the deliberate and wholesale murder of an entire ethnic or religious group is defined in international law exists in Gaza and that South Africa’s accusations are at least plausible even though they remain unproven for the moment.

The court, which will take years to examine the substance of the charges, also accepted South Africa’s argument that immediate measures should be taken to address the current Gaza wat.

The ruling means that Israel failed in its plea that the court should dismiss the entire matter.

However, Israel’s legal defeat is less significant than it currently seems.

The judges did not order a ceasefire in the Gaza war, as demanded by South Africa, nor did they direct Israel to stop its bombing.

The ICJ only instructed Israel to take every measure in its power to prevent military operations that could lead to genocide and to report to the ICJ on such measures.

The court’s interim ruling bore all the hallmarks of a very carefully drafted decision, written in the full knowledge it would have historical importance.