Opinion editor’s note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
Six months ago, South Africa filed a case at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands, accusing Israel of genocide, claiming that Israel’s “acts and omissions are genocidal … intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnic group.”
The Genocide Convention, ratified at the United Nations in 1948, defines genocide as “the intent to exterminate, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.”
On Jan. 26, the court issued provisional measures in the case, ordering Israel to prevent acts that could be considered genocidal and to enable humanitarian assistance to Gaza. Israel appeared to ignore the order. However, the court did not order Israel to suspend military activities in Gaza.
On May 24, the court, also known as the World Court, the ICJ and U.N. Court, ordered additional provisional measures: for Israel to halt its military operations in Rafah, Gaza.
Israel appears to be ignoring this order as well.
The ICJ is not a criminal court; it has no criminal penalties, and it cannot prosecute individuals. The court adjudicates states’ disputes over treaties and advises U.N. entities on legal questions. Established in 1945 by the U.N., all U.N. member states are parties to this court and can submit a case. Fully 153 states, including South Africa and Israel, have ratified the Genocide Convention, which means that any of these states can weigh in on cases concerning genocide. Although the court’s decisions are binding, the court has no mechanisms to enforce its decisions.