Introduction

The main points of contention between Israel and South Africa in the genocide case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are:

Points of contention

   1.    Genocidal intent:

   •    South Africa alleges that Israel’s actions in Gaza are “genocidal in character” and intended to destroy Palestinians as a group.
   •    Israel vehemently denies any genocidal intent, arguing that South Africa has failed to show the required specific intent for genocide.
 

 2.    Legal frameworkt:

   •    South Africa argues that Israel’s actions fall under the Genocide Convention.
   •    Israel contends that its actions should be evaluated under the law of armed conflict, not the Genocide Convention.
   

3.    Context of the conflict:

   •    South Africa focuses on Israel’s actions in Gaza, including the blockade and military operations.
   •    Israel emphasizes the context of the October 7 Hamas attack and its right to self-defense.

   4.    Jurisdiction and standing:

   •    Israel challenges the ICJ’s jurisdiction, arguing there is no dispute between Israel and South Africa.
   •    South Africa asserts its right to bring the case as a party to the Genocide Convention.

   5.    Humanitarian situation:

   •    South Africa highlights the mass killing, destruction of homes, and blockade of essential supplies in Gaza.
   •    Israel argues it is attempting to distinguish between Hamas militants and civilians, and that it is allowing humanitarian aid.

   6.    Provisional measures:

   •    South Africa requested immediate suspension of Israel’s military operations in Gaza.
   •    Israel contends that such measures would deprive it of its right to self-defense and encourage further attacks.

   7.    Evidence and factual interpretation:

   •    South Africa presents evidence of alleged genocidal acts and statements by Israeli officials.
   •    Israel argues that South Africa’s account is partial and decontextualized, urging the court to consider Israeli cabinet decisions rather than “random statements by politicians”.

   8.    Accusations of supporting Hamas:

   •    Israel accuses South Africa of functioning as the “legal arm” of Hamas and maintaining close relations with the group.
   •    South Africa denies these allegations and states its condemnation of Hamas’s actions in its ICJ application.

Conclusion

These points of contention form the core of the legal and factual disagreements between the two countries in this high-profile case at the ICJ.