What is genocide and why has South Africa taken Israel to court for it?

Published

1 year ago

January 26, 2024

admin

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is today delivering an interim ruling in the case that claims Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

South Africa filed the case, arguing Israel is breaching the UN convention on genocide by “killing Palestinians in Gaza, causing them serious bodily and mental harm, and inflicting on them conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction”.

Israel has described the lawsuit as a “despicable and contemptuous exploitation” of the court.

However, today’s ruling will not centre on the accusation of genocide – but instead, the court will make a decision on whether emergency measures suggested by South Africa should be implemented.

Follow our live blog for the hearing

What does genocide mean?

The term genocide was adopted by the UN soon after it was established in 1945, with a specific convention adopted on it in 1948.

According to the charter, genocide “means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”.

Examples include:

• Killing members of a group;

• Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

• Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

• Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

• Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

It was set up in wake of the Holocaust, in which the Nazis killed approximately six million Jewish people between 1941 and 1945, as part of the international community’s commitment to “never again”.

Since its inception there have only been three proven cases of genocide under the UN definition: the Khmer Rouge killing of Cambodian minority groups in the 1970s; the Srebrenica Massacre of Muslims in Bosnia in 1995; and the killing of Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994.

What is South Africa claiming – and why?

An 84-page court document set out South Africa’s case, which states that Israel’s “acts… in the wake of the attacks on 7 October 2023… are genocidal in character”.

It claims this is because they are “intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group, that being the part of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip”.

South Africa says Israel is “failing to prevent genocide and is committing genocide” in its war with Hamas.

In the court documents, lodged on 29 December, it also acknowledged “direct targeting of Israeli civilians and other nationals and hostage-taking by Hamas” on and after 7 October, which may breach international law.

As both South Africa and Israel are signatories to the 1948 convention, it argues the court has jurisdiction to stop Israel’s military offensive killing Palestinians in Gaza.

It also compares Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories to its own Apartheid period.

South Africa has a longstanding affinity with the Palestinian people.

After Nelson Mandela was freed from prison and became South African president, he said: “We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians”, and later wore a traditional keffiyeh to a pan-African event in Algeria in 1990.

Current South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has condemned Israel’s offensive in Gaza from the start.

Why do some in South Africa stand with Palestine?

Most South Africans recognise Israel’s complicity in their own oppression, according to Professor Salim Vally, the director for the centre for education rights and transformation at the University of Johannesburg.

“For example, Israel was an important arms supplier to apartheid South Africa, despite the international arms embargo,” he says.

“As late as 1980, 35% of Israel’s arms exports were destined for our country.

“When the global anti-apartheid movement forced countries to impose sanctions on the apartheid regime, Israel imported South African goods and re-exported them to the world as a form of inter-racist solidarity,” he adds.

“Israel was loyal to the apartheid state and clung to this friendship when almost all other relationships dissolved.”

How has Israel responded?

Historically, Israel has refused to engage with international tribunals, but sent a legal team to defend itself at The Hague this time.

It described South Africa as “hypocritical” and the lawsuit as a “blood libel” – a term used for antisemitic false allegations against Jewish people that originates from the Middle Ages.

What have Israel and Hamas said about the war?

Hamas fighters and other militant Palestinian groups killed 1,200 Israelis on 7 October, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) say. Some 240 were abducted and taken into Gaza, with 132 still missing.

The Israeli military says more than 200 of its soldiers have died fighting in Gaza so far.

According to the Hamas-run Palestinian health ministry, 25,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks since the conflict started.

Nearly all of the 2.3 million population of Gaza have been displaced by heavy bombing.

In its founding charter in 1988, Hamas declared there is “no solution for the Palestine question except through Jihad”, adding: “The day of judgement will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them”.

But in 2017 it changed the charter to reflect that “its conflict is with the Zionist project, not with the Jews because of their religion”.

Individual Hamas leaders however, such as Mahmoud Zahar, have claimed the killing of Israeli children has been “legitimised” by the killing of Palestinian infants by Israel.

At the beginning of the conflict, an Israeli military official declared: “We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza. There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything will be closed. We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said “Hamas must be destroyed” – but has not referenced Palestinians or the people of Gaza.

What power does the ICJ have?

The ICJ has the power to issue “provisional measures” – legally-binding court orders – that would last for the duration of the case.

South Africa wants it to use them to “immediately suspend military operations in and against Gaza”.

Although they are legally binding, they are not always adhered to.

For example, a joint case against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 resulted in provisional measures for Moscow to withdraw troops, but these were ignored by the Kremlin.

Like others before it, the case is likely to last for years, as proving “intent” to commit genocidal acts is a difficult and lengthy process.

Alexander Horne, a barrister and visiting law professor at Durham University, who is also a dual British-Israeli national, said Israel will be “determined to demonstrate its armed forces have acted both morally and proportionately following the horrendous events of 7 October”.

He added that its choice of supreme court judge Aharon Barak as its representative suggests it is taking the case “very seriously”.

If the court does impose provisional measures it would be “hugely problematic” for the Israeli offensive, which it has vowed will continue until all hostages are returned, he said.

World

This flimsy vessel carrying migrants could be hours away from reaching British waters

Published

8 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

This flimsy vessel carrying migrants could be hours away from reaching British waters

We see the boat from a distance – the orange of the life jackets reflected in the rising sun.

And as we draw closer, we can make out dozens of people crowded on board as it sets off from the shore, from a beach near Dunkirk.

There is no sign of any police activity on the shore, and there are no police vessels in the water.

Instead, the migrants crammed into an inflatable dinghy are being watched by us, on board a private boat, and the looming figure of the Minck, a French search and rescue ship that soon arrives.

The dinghy meanders. It’s not heading towards Britain but rather hugging the coast.

A few of the passengers wave at us cheerfully, but then the boat starts to head back towards the shore.

As it nears a different beach, we see a police vehicle – a dune buggy – heading down to meet it.

Normal practice is for French police officers to slice through the material of any of these small boats that end up back on shore.

Two police officers get out of the buggy and wait. A police helicopter arrives and circles above, performing a tight circle over the heads of the migrants.

The police think they might be about to go back on to the beach; in fact, these passengers know that most of them are staying put.

The boat stops a short distance from the shore and four people jump out. As they wade towards the beach, the boat turns and starts to head back out to sea.

We see the two police officers approach these four men and have a brief conversation.

They don’t appear to check the bags they are carrying and, if they do question them about why they left the boat, it is the most cursory of conversations.

In reality, these people probably don’t speak French but they were almost certainly involved in arranging this crossing, which is against the law. But all four walk away, disappearing into the dunes at the back of the beach.

We follow the boat as it chugs off in the direction of Britain, carrying around 50 people.

The Minck returns to shadowing its progress, but its job is limited to offering help if the boat gets into trouble.

Otherwise, if the engine keeps working, then this flimsy vessel will reach British waters in a few hours’ time.

World

IDF chief says conditions ‘created’ for Gaza ceasefire – as Trump says it could be ‘this week or next’

Published

1 day ago

July 9, 2025

admin

IDF chief says conditions 'created' for Gaza ceasefire - as Trump says it could be 'this week or next'

Donald Trump and a leading figure in the Israeli army have suggested a ceasefire in Gaza could be close.

Eyal Zamir, chief of staff of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), told Israeli media that “conditions were created to advance a deal” to bring about an end to the conflict in the coastal territory, and the release of hostages.

In a televised address, he said: “We have achieved many significant results, we have caused great damage to the governance and military capabilities of Hamas.

“Thanks to the operational power that we have demonstrated, the conditions have been created to advance a deal to release the hostages.”

‘This week, or next’

It comes as the US president hosts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington DC on a prolonged visit this week.

Mr Trump said his meetings with Mr Netanyahu were focused “on Gaza for the most part”.

He said: “I think we have a chance [of a ceasefire] this week, or next week.”

However, the US leader added: “Not definitely,” saying nothing was certain about the situation in Gaza.

Hamas reiterates ‘keenness’ to end fighting

Meanwhile, Hamas has repeated its message that it is committed to the negotiations but warned of a number of sticking points despite the positive noises from senior Israeli figures.

In a statement, the militant group said: “In its keenness to succeed in the ongoing efforts, the movement [Hamas] has shown the necessary flexibility and agreed to release 10 prisoners.

“The key points remain under negotiation, foremost among them: the flow of aid, the withdrawal of the occupation from the territories of the Gaza Strip, and the provision of real guarantees for a permanent ceasefire.”

Mr Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff previously told a cabinet meeting that the anticipated ceasefire would last 60 days and involve the release of ten hostages and nine bodies.

A source close to the negotiations told Sky News that the hostage release would take place in two waves during the 60 days and was conditional on the ceasefire.

Israeli strikes continue

It comes as Israeli attacks on Gaza continue.

According to hospital officials, at least 40 Palestinians were killed in the latest attacks on Gaza – including 10 people from the same family.

Nasser Hospital in the southern Gaza city of Khan Younis said the dead included 17 women and 10 children.

World

Why do so many from around the world try to cross the English Channel?

Published

1 day ago

July 9, 2025

admin

Why do so many from around the world try to cross the English Channel?

While the politicians talk, so many people come from around the world to try to get across the Channel on small boats. But why?

Why make such a perilous crossing to try to get to a country that seems to be getting increasingly hostile to asylum seekers?

As the British and French leaders meet, with small boats at the forefront of their agenda, we came to northern France to get some answers.

It is not a new question, but it is peppered with fresh relevance.

Over the course of a morning spent around a migrant camp in Dunkirk, we meet migrants from Gaza, Iraq, Eritrea, South Sudan, Sri Lanka and beyond.

Some are fearful, waving us away; some are happy to talk. Very few are comfortable to be filmed.

All but one man – who says he’s come to the wrong place and actually wants to claim asylum in Paris – are intent on reaching Britain.

They see the calm seas, feel the light winds – perfect conditions for small boat crossings.

John has come here from South Sudan. He tells me he’s now 18 years old. He left his war-torn home nation just before his 16th birthday. He feels that reaching Britain is his destiny.

“England is my dream country,” he says. “It has been my dream since I was at school. It’s the country that colonised us and when I get there, I will feel like I am home.

“In England, they can give me an opportunity to succeed or to do whatever I need to do in my life. I feel like I am an English child, who was born in Africa.”

He says he would like to make a career in England, either as a journalist or in human resources, and, like many others we meet, is at pains to insist he will work hard.

The boat crossing is waved away as little more than an inconvenience – a trifle compared with the previous hardships of his journey towards Britain.

We meet a group of men who have all travelled from Gaza, intent on starting new lives in Britain and then bringing their families over to join them.

One man, who left Gaza two years ago, tells me that his son has since been shot in the leg “but there is no hospital for him to go to”.

Next to him, a man called Abdullah says he entered Europe through Greece and stayed there for months on end, but was told the Greek authorities would never allow him to bring over his family.

Britain, he thinks, will be more accommodating. “Gaza is being destroyed – we need help,” he says.

A man from Eritrea tells us he is escaping a failing country and has friends in Britain – he plans to become a bicycle courier in either London or Manchester.

He can’t stay in France, he says, because he doesn’t speak French. The English language is presented as a huge draw for many of the people we talk to, just as it had been during similar conversations over the course of many years.

I ask many of these people why they don’t want to stay in France, or another safe European country.

Some repeat that they cannot speak the language and feel ostracised. Another says that he tried, and failed, to get a residency permit in both France and Belgium.

But this is also, clearly, a flawed survey. Last year, five times as many people sought asylum in France as in Britain.

And French critics have long insisted that Britain, a country without a European-style ID card system, makes itself attractive to migrants who can “disappear”.

A young man from Iraq, with absolutely perfect English, comes for a chat. He oozes confidence and a certain amount of mischief.

It has taken him only seven days to get from Iraq to Dunkirk; when I ask how he has made the trip so quickly, he shrugs. “Money talks”.

He looks around him. “Let me tell you – all of these people you see around you will be getting to Britain and the first job they get will be in the black market, so they won’t be paying any tax.

“Back in the day in Britain, they used to welcome immigrants very well, but these days I don’t think they want to, because there’s too many of them coming by boat. Every day it’s about seven or 800 people. That’s too many people.”

“But,” I ask, “if those people are a problem – then what makes you different? Aren’t you a problem too?”

He shakes his head emphatically. “I know that I’m a very good guy. And I won’t be a problem. I’ll only stay in Britain for a few years and then I’ll leave again.”

A man from Sri Lanka says he “will feel safe” when he gets to Britain; a tall, smiling man from Ethiopia echoes the sentiment: “We are not safe in our home country so we have come all this way,” he says. “We want to work, to be part of Britain.”

Emmanuel is another from South Sudan – thoughtful and eloquent. He left his country five years ago – “at the start of COVID” – and has not seen his children in all that time. His aim is to start a new life in Britain, and then to bring his family to join him.

He is a trained electrical engineer, but says he could also work as a lorry driver. He is adamant that Britain has a responsibility to the people of its former colony.