Articles for tag: IGH, judicial independence, South Africa v. Israel

From One ICJ to Another

In early August, Judge Julia Sebutinde of the International Court of Justice was reported as saying that “The Lord is counting on me to stand on the side of Israel”, and that the “whole world was against Israel, including my country.” These statements appear to contradict the requirement that Judges remain impartial. Following these remarks, a non-governmental organization called the International Commission of Jurists sent a communication to the President of the Court to urge him to investigate Judge Sebutinde’s remarks. While this move was met with general acclaim on social media, it could likewise be perceived as attempting to put external pressure on the Court to reach a certain decision.

1. September 2025

, ,

“Almost Genocide”

Genocidal intent does not necessarily pop, prefabricated, out of the perpetrator’s state’s head. It emerges – gradually, often unevenly – as a product of action, omission, emotion, and political opportunity. A war that once had legal justification as defence can thus harden into something else: the destruction of a group as such. This is as true in the specific conditions of Gaza, as it is as a matter of principle.

15. Juni 2025

, , ,

Genocide in Gaza?

&

“Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.” This was the claim raised by South Africa before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague just two and a half months after Hamas' large-scale terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. South Africa alleges that Israel's military counteroffensive is not (primarily) directed against Hamas, but rather aims to destroy the group of Palestinians in Gaza as such. This accusation carries significant political and legal weight. However, proving the necessary intent to destroy is difficult; it should not be accepted lightly. At any rate, as Israel's warfare continues and becomes increasingly brutal, the evidence for genocide is mounting.

4. Juni 2025

, , , ,

Giving Covenants Swords

The classical Hobbesian critique of international law famously asserts that “covenants, without the sword, are but words.” Accordingly, given Israel’s persistent non-compliance with the ICJ’s provisional measures in South Africa v. Israel, on 29 May 2024, South Africa requested “the Security Council to give effect to the Court’s judgments” under Article 41 of the ICJ Statute. This post shows why the discussions on whether the Council lacks the statutory authority to supervise and enforce the Court’s provisional measures under the ICJ Statute overlook the broader point. Namely, the Order on provisional measures is the perfect legal evidence for the Council to trigger its powers under Chapter VII and thus end the humanitarian calamity in Gaza.

10. Juli 2024

, , , , , , ,