Israel’s foreign minister Israel Katz issued a statement as the ICJ hearing ended, and said that no evidence has been presented against Israel, but “only indications of a moral warfare like no other.”
“South Africa itself undermines the genocide allegation by supporting the terrorist organization Hamas, which calls for the destruction of the State of Israel,” he added.
“I hope the complaint will be dismissed at the threshold, and I believe that justice will prevail, he concluded.”
Protesters gathered outside the ICJ in the Hague on Friday, as Israel presents its case against South Africa’s genocide accusations.
Some of the demonstrators are calling for the return of those captured by Hamas in the Gaza Strip, including family members of those held captive. Another group of protesters at a separate demonstration supports the appeal of South Africa and calls for an end to the fighting.
The judges at the International Court of Justice in The Hague stated that they would deliver their decision as swiftly as possible. They further mentioned the possibility of seeking additional remarks from both sides.
Israeli Deputy Attorney General, Gilad Noam, told the ICJ panel that the “shock and deep pain that has affected Israelis since Oct. 7 naturally led to harsh statements on the enemy who is committed to destruct Jews and Israelis.”
He said that “any statement calling for intentional harm to civilians contradicts the policy of Israel and may amount to a criminal offense, including incitement. Several such cases are examined in Israeli law enforcement system.”
He said that South Africa “tried to show Israel as a lawless state, as a state in which the entire public service and military are singularly consumed with destroying an entire population.”
As the deputy attorney general, he said, “I can attest that Israel remains committed to international law. When the cannons roar in Gaza, the law is not silent. Israel’s commitment to the rule of law has remained steadfast, as said in Israel’s declaration of Independence. One of the first steps the IDF took in 1948, was to establish a military justice system, thus, the IDF advocate general is institutionally independent. Her staff are interwoven in to all of Israel’s military actions. The civilian legal system reviews the military legal system, enjoying full institutional independence. Indeed, during the current conflict, the court has considered petitions regarding the war. The IDF has a robust system of examining violations of International humanitarian law. The rule of law remains a pillar in the state of Israel.”
Turkey is providing documents for a case brought by South Africa against Israel at the U.N.’s top court on a charge of committing genocide against Palestinian civilians, President Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday.
Speaking to reporters in Istanbul, Erdogan said that Turkey will continue to provide documents, mostly visuals, on Israel’s attacks on Gaza.
“I believe that Israel will be convicted there. We believe in the justice of the International Court of Justice,” Erdogan said.
Israeli defense advisor Omri Sender said that the Israeli defense minister said that Israel is phasing the war to a new stage, speaking of “new, less intense” phase of fighting while reducing amount of troops from Gaza.
He also remarked that Israel is already working with a senior UN coordinator, according to a security council measure, and directed “to map the needs of future return of Palestinians to northern Gaza.”
“Israel found willingness to act in accordance, without obligation,” he said, which “shows that Israel remains bound by its international and legal obligations, especially as a party to the genocide convention.”
Galit Raguan, representative in Israel’s defense team, said that “South Africa did not consider the sheer extent to which Hamas uses ostensibly civilian structures for military purposes. Houses, schools, mosques, UN facilities and shelters are all abused for military purposes by Hamas, including rocket launching sites.”
She also argued that “Hamas has attacked IDF forces securing humanitarian corridors.”
She added that The IDF “has reached out to every hospital and offered assistance in relocating patients and staff to safer areas,” and highlighted the efforts of the IDF’s COGAT, which she says works “around the clock” to ensure safety of Gaza civilians.
Raguan claimed that “Gaza residents have reported that Hamas has stolen aid,” such as fuel and medical equipment.
“Measures taken by the IDF intended to mitigate harm to the civilian population, sometimes exceeding the requirements of international humanitarian law, is proof, according to South Africa, of Israel’s intent to commit genocide. When in fact it proves the exact opposite,” she argued.
Israel argues it has no jurisdiction under the Genocide Convention to order it to halt its military actions in the Gaza Strip.
Israel did not have the needed “special intent” to commit crimes under the Genocide Convention, its lawyer said at the second day of hearings of a case in which South Africa has demanded an immediate end to Israel’s offensive against the Palestinian Islamist militant group Hamas that runs Gaza.
“This is no genocide. South Africa tells us only half the story,” lawyer Malcolm Shaw said.
Israeli defense representative Malcolm Shaw said that If IDF soldiers violated laws of war, they will be judged within Israel’s ‘robust’ legal system.
He stated, “Were it the case, which we deny, that Israeli forces have transgressed some rules of conflict, then the matter would be tackled at the appropriate time, by Israel’s independent and robust legal system. But that is not the intent to destroy in whole or in part of a people as such.”
He added that: “Remarks or actions by a soldier do not and cannot reflect policy. What comes from the IDF chief of staff clearly show the intent to prevent and reduce civilian casualties and following the rules of war.”
Malcolm Shaw said, to combat genocidal statements made by Israeli far-right politicians, that “in order to determine the policy and intentions of the Israeli government, it is necessary to examine the decisions made by the war cabinet and security cabinet, and to examine whether the particular comments expressed confirm or not the policy and decisions made.”
“Choosing random quotes, which not in conformity with government policy, is misleading at best,” he argued. “Such as the statement by heritage minister, who is completely outside policy decision-making stages of war. His statement was immediately repudiated by the prime minister and ministers.”
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
