Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan reports today (2/14) in his blog Informed Comment that on Monday, Feb. 12,
the South African government lodged an urgent complaint on Monday at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the plan announced by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to attack Rafah in southern Gaza, where 1.4 million people, most of them refugees from elsewhere, have been pushed by the Israeli military.
Professor Cole adds:
South Africa has inquired with the ICJ whether it needs to issue another preliminary judgment to stop Israel’s planned offensive against Rafah. The Court is permitted to issue provisional orders at any time without having to convene to decide the case finally.
Cole quotes this statement from the South African presidency web site:
The South African Government has made an urgent request to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to consider whether the decision announced by Israel to extend its military operations in Rafah, which is the last refuge for surviving people in Gaza, requires that the court uses its power to prevent further imminent breach of the rights of Palestinians in Gaza.
In a request submitted to the court yesterday (12 February 2024), the South African government said it was 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 large scale killing, harm and destruction. This would be in serious and irreparable breach both of the Genocide Convention and of the Court’s Order of 26 January 2024.
South Africa trusts this matter will receive the necessary urgency in light of the daily death toll in Gaza.
Cole explains: “On January 26, the International Court of Justice instructed Israel to cease actions in Gaza that meet the definition of genocide in international law”, and he quotes from the ICJ statement:
The Court considers that, with regard to the situation described above, Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention.
In his article, Cole enumerates acts prohibited by the Genocide Convention. He also comments:
Not only has the Israeli government thumbed its nose at the court’s preliminary injunction, continuing to kill dozens of non-combatants daily and continuing to bomb dense population centers, including refugee camps, but now is planning an operation that human rights organizations are warning would be catastrophic.
In conclusion, Cole says:
Although it may take a long time for the court to rule on whether Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide, the court has already issued the equivalent of a preliminary injunction, recognizing the plausibility of the South African allegations.