International Law is a very unique field of the legal sphere. With the South African application aimed at the current conflict between Israel and Palestine, which was launched on 28 December 2023, a lot of questions arise as to what this application means, or how the proceedings will be held. This article looks towards explaining some aspects raised through the application.

South Africa has instituted the application through the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which is located in The Hague, Netherlands. The ICJ can be summarised as the Court of the World, meant to hear arguments and rule upon disputes between different nations as the parties to the case before them. The ICJ has several judges seated who preside over matters, each judge having a completely different background and nationality. The Judges are selected from across the world to assist the international community, and have nationalities ranging from the United States, Jamaica, Russia, Morocco and various other countries.

The ICJ is able to hear various cases related to international disputes between countries, but may only be approached to hold jurisdiction over a case if both countries (parties) to the case have accepted the jurisdiction of the ICJ in one of the following ways:

  1. Both Countries enter into a special agreement for the ICJ to hold jurisdiction over the case;
  2. If the Countries have signed a treaty which contains a clause whereby disputes regarding the particular treaty can be heard by the ICJ;
  3. By both Countries declaring under the Statute, that they accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ as compulsory in the event of a dispute arising with another country, and that country having made a similar and reciprocal declaration. A number of these declarations, which must be rendered and given to the United Nations Secretary-General, contain reservations excluding certain categories of dispute.

When the Countries have confirmed that the ICJ holds jurisdiction over a dispute, then further proceedings can be enacted, which is done in one of two ways. These are summarised as follows:

  1. Both Countries can present a case jointly by way of special agreement, whereby either party may present the dispute to the ICJ and it is requested that assistance be given to both countries as to the correct outcome of the disagreement. This process is more bilateral in nature.
  2. The Second form of proceedings is by way of an application being brought to the ICJ. A Country brings a formal application against another country where the dispute will be argued before the presiding officers of the ICJ.

The case currently pending was instituted by way of an application brought to the ICJ, and the two parties to this case is South Africa and secondly Israel. To further delve into the details of the application, we should look at what South Africa is asking as relief from the Court. South Africa is requesting primarily that the State of Israel must ensure that it no longer breaches International conventions under the Genocide Convention and its articles. This can be shortly summarised as South Africa requesting the Israel ceases any acts of genocide against the populace present in Palestine.

Disputes of an international nature are most often intricate and complex, which necessitates that a fair share of research must be done by the presiding judges of the ICJ before coming to a decision and issuing of a judgement. This leads to most international cases taking extensive periods of time to conclude or come to a decision being handed down. South Africa is further requesting from the ICJ an interim relief, and as a matter of urgency. This relief is meant to alleviate some of the disputes for the interim period before the final judgement is handed down by the ICJ at a later stage. These interim measures requested are:

  1. The State of Israel shall immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza.
  2. The State of Israel shall ensure that any military or irregular armed units which may be directed, supported or influenced by it, as well as any organisations and persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence, take no steps in furtherance of the military operations referred to point (1) above.
  3. The Republic of South Africa and the State of Israel shall each, in accordance with their obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in relation to the Palestinian people, take all reasonable measures within their power to prevent genocide.
  4. The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to the Palestinian as a group protected by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, desist from the commission of any and all acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention, in particular:

(a) killing members of the group;

(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to the members of the group;

(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and

(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

  1. The State of Israel shall, pursuant to point (4)(c) above, in relation to Palestinians, desist from, and take all measures within its power including the rescinding of relevant orders, of restrictions and/or of prohibitions to prevent:

(a) the expulsion and forced displacement from their homes;

(b) the deprivation of:

(i) access to adequate food and water;

(ii) access to humanitarian assistance, including access to adequate fuel, shelter, clothes, hygiene and sanitation;

(iii) medical supplies and assistance; and

(c) the destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza.

  1. The State of Israel shall, in relation to Palestinians, ensure that its military, as well as any irregular armed units or individuals which may be directed, supported or otherwise influenced by it and any organizations and persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence, do not commit any acts described in (4) and (5) above, or engage in direct and public incitement to commit genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, or complicity in genocide, and insofar as they do engage therein, that steps are taken towards their punishment pursuant to Articles I, II, III and IV of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
  2. The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; to that end, the State of Israel shall not act to deny or otherwise restrict access by fact-finding missions, international mandates and other bodies to Gaza to assist in ensuring the preservation and retention of said evidence.
  3. The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one week, as from the date of this Order, and thereafter at such regular intervals as the Court shall order, until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court.
  4. The State of Israel shall refrain from any action and shall ensure that no action is taken which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve.

South Africa’s interim relief sought is a good indication of the requests made primarily throughout the application before the ICJ. South Africa has been able to venerate the standing and argue the case before the presiding judges for two days, and Israel will be allowed a chance to respond and argue on Friday 12 January 2024. The case has continuously been called “Historic” by professors and legal scholars world-wide, and all papers and proceedings can be read and followed on the International Court of Justice’s website, under www.icj-cij.org and all proceedings are available in the two official languages of the Court, English or French.