WATCH: Court order ‘doesn’t work’ without ceasefire
Video content
Video caption: I hoped ceasefire would be ordered, says South Africa foreign ministerI hoped ceasefire would be ordered, says South Africa foreign minister
South Africa’s foreign minister Naledi Pandor is speaking to reporters outside the court.
She says that without a ceasefire in Gaza, “the order doesn’t actually work”.
“I would have wanted that the word cessation is included in the judgement but I’m satisfied with the directions that have been given,” she says.
Asked by a journalist whether she thinks Israel “will conform to the orders”, she replies she’s “never really been hopeful about Israel”, but hopes the country’s “powerful friends” will advise it to comply with the order.
The South African government has also released a statement welcoming the court orders and calling the judgement a “landmark ruling”.
We will continue to defend ourselves – Netanyahu
Benjamin Netanyahu has given his reaction to the courts ruling, saying Israel will “continue to defend ourselves and our citizens while adhering to international law”.
The Israeli prime minister goes on to say that Israel will “continue this war until absolute victory” and until “all hostages are returned”.
His comments come after today’s ruling that Israel must take all measures to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza.
The court did not agree with South Africa’s request for an immediate ceasefire.
Analysis
Court is saying the way Israel conducts the war has to change
Jeremy Bowen
International Editor
What the judge has said adds up to a victory for South Africa’s lawyers and a defeat for Israel’s.
She didn’t say “you have to have a ceasefire” because under international humanitarian law, under the right circumstances and within the legal framework, the war is legal and Israel was attacked.
But what she is saying is the way that Israel conducts the war really has to change radically under these conditions.
Israel has consistently said that its fight respects the laws of war. The judge’s remarks indicate that the court does not agree.
I think the Israelis will be outraged by the judgement and the South Africans will be very happy that the case they made will be accepted by the court, and that the case will now proceed.
Judges ruled in favour of humanity, says Palestinian minister
Some immediate reaction now from the Palestinian foreign minister, who has welcomed the provisional measures ordered by the International Court of Justice.
“ICJ judges assessed the facts and the law, ruled in favour of humanity and international law,” Riyad Al-Maliki says, according to the Reuters news agency.
Al-Maliki is from the Palestinian Authority which runs part of the West Bank, and is a rival to Hamas.
Analysis
Court stops short of requesting immediate ceasefire
Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent
The court did not agree to South Africa’s request for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza – something that will disappoint the South Africans and Palestinians alike.
But by large majorities the court’s 17 judges ruled, among other measures, that Israel should do everything in its power to avoid killing Palestinians, causing them serious bodily or mental harm or imposing measures intended to prevent Palestinian women from giving birth.
This is not the court’s final ruling on genocide – that’s likely to take several years. But the measures called for today are designed to make sure that while the judges consider South Africa’s fundamental charge against Israel, the Palestinians of Gaza enjoy some measure of protection.
Israel must now decide how to respond. The ICJ’s rulings are binding, but there’s no enforcement mechanism. Israel could choose to ignore the judges altogether. But with diplomatic efforts now apparently concentrating on the possibility of a two-month ceasefire, and efforts still being made to improve the flow of aid into the Gaza Strip, Israel may argue that it’s already taking steps to meet the court’s demands.
ICJ session ends
The reading of the ruling at the ICJ has now finished.
We’ll bring you more reaction and analysis on its ruling and its significance, so stay with us.
The provisional measures issued by court
Anna Holligan
Reporting from The Hague
There was a lot of detail there. Here are the provisional measures the court has made:
Israel must take all measures to prevent any acts that could be considered genocidal – killing members of a group, causing bodily harm, inflicting conditions designed to bring about the destruction of a group, preventing births
Israel must ensure its military does not commit any genocidal acts
Israel must prevent and punish any public comments that could be considered incitement to commit genocide in Gaza
Israel must take measures to ensure humanitarian access
Israel must prevent any destruction of evidence that could be used in a genocide case
Israel must submit a report to the court within one month of this order being given
The court also expressed grave concern about the fate of hostages being held by Hamas and called for their immediate release.
Court calls on Israel to preserve evidence
The judge is now turning to the order requiring Israel to prevent the destruction of – and ensure the preservation of – evidence.
This order also includes not denying access to this evidence by fact-finding missions, international mandates and other bodies to Gaza.
The court voted 15 to 2 on this order.
The judge says the court votes by 15 to two that Israel will send a report to court within one month of the order
ReutersCopyright: Reuters
Judge outlines voting on measures
The judge is now recapping the court’s orders and how each judge voted.
The court voted 15 votes to two on the order that Israel must take all measures in its power to stop genocidal acts in Gaza.
She then reads the names of the judges who voted for and against.
By 15 votes to 2, the court votes that Israel must ensure its military does not commit genocidal acts
By 16 votes to one, the court has voted that Israel needs to take all measures within its powers to prevent and punish those involved with inciting genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
Again, by a vote of 16 to one, the court says Israel must take “immediate and effective” measures to ensure the provision of urgently needed humanitarian aid and basic services.
Court’s decision does not prejudice later ruling on genocide, says judge
She says the decision today does not prejudice the court against the decision it will make later on South Africa’s allegation of genocide. As we’ve been reporting, the court is not expected to rule on that allegation – which Israel strongly denies – for several years.
She then emphasises to “all parties to the conflict in the Gaza Strip” that they are bound by humanitarian law.
She says the court is concerned about the fate of the hostages that remain in Gaza.
Donoghue outlines measures Israel must take
Donoghue outlines measures Israel must take. She says the country must take all measures to prevent acts that could be considered genocidal – such as killing members of a group or inflicting conditions designed to bring about the destruction of a group.
Israel must ensure its military does not commit any genocidal act, she says.
The country must also prevent and punish any comments considered to incite genocide in Gaza.
Israel must also take immediate and effective measures for basic services and humanitarian measures, she says.
Donoghue says Israel must also prevent any destruction of evidence that could be used in a genocide case. Finally, she says Israel must also submit a report to the court within one month of this order.
Court can issue provisional measures, says judge
She rules that the court can issue provisional, emergency measures and notes the measures indicated need not be identical to those requested by South Africa.
She then outlines which of South Africa’s requested measures the court will grant.
She says Israel must desist from killing, injuring, destroying life and preventing births in relation to Palestinians.
These acts fall within the scope of the Genocide Convention, she says.
Israel’s steps to mitigate harm against civilians not enough, judge says
ICJCopyright: ICJ
Judge Joan DonoghueImage caption: Judge Joan Donoghue
The judge is now reading out some letters and statements by high-ranking UN officials about the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.
Some of these letters observe a breakdown of Gazan society and that the humanitarian crisis is only worsening.
Donoghue says the court considers that the civilian population in Gaza remains extremely vulnerable.
She notes that the Israeli military operation is ongoing and that the prime minister has said the war will take “many months”.
Israel says it has taken efforts to mitigate harm against civilians, the court notes, but while such steps “are to be encouraged”, the judge says they’re not enough.
The humanitarian situation is at serious risk of deterioration before the court renders its final judgement, she says, and therefore there is a sense of urgency here.
Analysis
Judge delivers bleak assessment of situation in Gaza
Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent
Judge Joan Donoghue has delivered a bleak summary of the suffering experienced by Palestinians, and says the plight of children “is especially heart-breaking”.
She says some of the rights sought by South Africa on behalf of the Palestinians are “plausible”.
It seems likely that she will uphold at least some of South Africa’s nine requests.
ReutersCopyright: Reuters
A member of South African legal team John DugardImage caption: A member of South African legal team John Dugard
Donoghue notes comments made by Israeli ministers
The court hears statements made by Israeli officials, and notes that on 9 October, the defence minister ordered a complete siege of Gaza.
Israel’s Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said he had released all restrictions on fighting against “human animals”, adding: “We will eliminate everything.”
Donoghue continues by reading comments made by Israeli President Isaac Herzog three days later in which he said the military was working according to the rules of international law.
“We are at war,” he says, adding that civilians in Gaza “could have risen up” to remove Hamas, which rules in Gaza.
Donoghue goes on to say that she will be taking public statements such as these into account when dealing with the scope of the case.
At least some of the rights asserted by South Africa – for Gazans to be protected from acts of genocide under the Genocide Convention – do exist, she says.
Judge turns to humanitarian situation in Gaza
ICJCopyright: ICJ
Judge Joan DonoghueImage caption: Judge Joan Donoghue
The judge is now turning to the humanitarian situation on the ground in Gaza.
She quotes UN emergency relief coordinator Martin Griffiths, who says “Gaza has become a place of death and despair”.
The judge says 1.7 million people have been displaced in Gaza and the enclave has become “uninhabitable”.
She notes, however, that the numbers coming out of Gaza can’t be independently verified.
1.4 million people are now in UN shelters where they lack everything, she says.
She also notes the commissioner-general for the UN relief agency for Palestinian refugees has said the crisis in Gaza is compounded by inhumane language.
She quotes some example of statements to this effect by senior Israelis.
Israel loses procedural question
Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent
Judge Joan Donoghue has not dismissed the entire case, as Israel has demanded. She said there was sufficient evidence of a dispute between Israel and South Africa and that South Africa has standing to bring the case.
She has moved on to examine the question of whether any of the nine provisional measures demanded by South Africa are justified.
ReutersCopyright: Reuters
South Africa has legal standing to bring case, says judge
ICJ president Judge Donoghue continues by discussing the legal standing of South Africa in its ability to bring this case.
Israel did not object to South Africa’s standing, she says, adding that any party to the Genocide Convention can bring a case against another state.
South Africa has standing to submit the dispute with Israel concerning alleged violations of obligations under the convention, she states.
Court has jurisdiction to consider case, judge says
Donoghue continues on the issue of whether the court has jurisdiction in this case – essentially whether it can make orders.
In particular, she is looking at whether there is a dispute between South Africa and Israel, and is setting out the legal framework the court is applying to it.
She notes that South Africa has previously made public comments suggesting that Israel may have acted contrary to its obligations under the genocide convention.
She further notes Israel has dismissed any notion of genocide in Gaza.
The parties hold opposite views regarding Israel’s obligation, she says.
Therefore, there is a dispute between the two parties. South Africa considers Israel to be responsible for genocide in Gaza.
The judge says at least some of the acts and omissions appear to fall within the genocide convention.
She concludes the court has jurisdiction to consider the case.
ICJ ‘deeply concerned’ by continuing loss of life
Donoghue speaks next about the context that has led to South Africa’s application to the court.
She speaks of the 7 October attack, in which Hamas killed more than 1,200 people, injured thousands and took about 240 people hostage – many of whom are still captive.
Israel then began its military operation, she continues, causing massive civilian casualties, extensive damage to Gaza and displacing the overwhelming majority of the population.
She notes the court is “deeply concerned” by the continuing loss of life and human suffering.
She says that the scope of the present case is limited, and that South Africa and Israel are both parties to the Genocide Convention.
Live Reporting
Edited by Nathan Williams and Alex Therrien
Get involved
WATCH: Court order ‘doesn’t work’ without ceasefire
Video content
South Africa’s foreign minister Naledi Pandor is speaking to reporters outside the court.
She says that without a ceasefire in Gaza, “the order doesn’t actually work”.
“I would have wanted that the word cessation is included in the judgement but I’m satisfied with the directions that have been given,” she says.
Asked by a journalist whether she thinks Israel “will conform to the orders”, she replies she’s “never really been hopeful about Israel”, but hopes the country’s “powerful friends” will advise it to comply with the order.
The South African government has also released a statement welcoming the court orders and calling the judgement a “landmark ruling”.
We will continue to defend ourselves – Netanyahu
Benjamin Netanyahu has given his reaction to the courts ruling, saying Israel will “continue to defend ourselves and our citizens while adhering to international law”.
The Israeli prime minister goes on to say that Israel will “continue this war until absolute victory” and until “all hostages are returned”.
His comments come after today’s ruling that Israel must take all measures to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza.
The court did not agree with South Africa’s request for an immediate ceasefire.
Court is saying the way Israel conducts the war has to change
Jeremy Bowen
International Editor
What the judge has said adds up to a victory for South Africa’s lawyers and a defeat for Israel’s.
She didn’t say “you have to have a ceasefire” because under international humanitarian law, under the right circumstances and within the legal framework, the war is legal and Israel was attacked.
But what she is saying is the way that Israel conducts the war really has to change radically under these conditions.
Israel has consistently said that its fight respects the laws of war. The judge’s remarks indicate that the court does not agree.
I think the Israelis will be outraged by the judgement and the South Africans will be very happy that the case they made will be accepted by the court, and that the case will now proceed.
Judges ruled in favour of humanity, says Palestinian minister
Some immediate reaction now from the Palestinian foreign minister, who has welcomed the provisional measures ordered by the International Court of Justice.
“ICJ judges assessed the facts and the law, ruled in favour of humanity and international law,” Riyad Al-Maliki says, according to the Reuters news agency.
Al-Maliki is from the Palestinian Authority which runs part of the West Bank, and is a rival to Hamas.
Court stops short of requesting immediate ceasefire
Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent
The court did not agree to South Africa’s request for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza – something that will disappoint the South Africans and Palestinians alike.
But by large majorities the court’s 17 judges ruled, among other measures, that Israel should do everything in its power to avoid killing Palestinians, causing them serious bodily or mental harm or imposing measures intended to prevent Palestinian women from giving birth.
This is not the court’s final ruling on genocide – that’s likely to take several years. But the measures called for today are designed to make sure that while the judges consider South Africa’s fundamental charge against Israel, the Palestinians of Gaza enjoy some measure of protection.
Israel must now decide how to respond. The ICJ’s rulings are binding, but there’s no enforcement mechanism. Israel could choose to ignore the judges altogether. But with diplomatic efforts now apparently concentrating on the possibility of a two-month ceasefire, and efforts still being made to improve the flow of aid into the Gaza Strip, Israel may argue that it’s already taking steps to meet the court’s demands.
ICJ session ends
The reading of the ruling at the ICJ has now finished.
We’ll bring you more reaction and analysis on its ruling and its significance, so stay with us.
The provisional measures issued by court
Anna Holligan
Reporting from The Hague
There was a lot of detail there. Here are the provisional measures the court has made:
The court also expressed grave concern about the fate of hostages being held by Hamas and called for their immediate release.
Court calls on Israel to preserve evidence
The judge is now turning to the order requiring Israel to prevent the destruction of – and ensure the preservation of – evidence.
This order also includes not denying access to this evidence by fact-finding missions, international mandates and other bodies to Gaza.
The court voted 15 to 2 on this order.
The judge says the court votes by 15 to two that Israel will send a report to court within one month of the order
Judge outlines voting on measures
The judge is now recapping the court’s orders and how each judge voted.
The court voted 15 votes to two on the order that Israel must take all measures in its power to stop genocidal acts in Gaza.
She then reads the names of the judges who voted for and against.
By 15 votes to 2, the court votes that Israel must ensure its military does not commit genocidal acts
By 16 votes to one, the court has voted that Israel needs to take all measures within its powers to prevent and punish those involved with inciting genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
Again, by a vote of 16 to one, the court says Israel must take “immediate and effective” measures to ensure the provision of urgently needed humanitarian aid and basic services.
Court’s decision does not prejudice later ruling on genocide, says judge
She says the decision today does not prejudice the court against the decision it will make later on South Africa’s allegation of genocide. As we’ve been reporting, the court is not expected to rule on that allegation – which Israel strongly denies – for several years.
She then emphasises to “all parties to the conflict in the Gaza Strip” that they are bound by humanitarian law.
She says the court is concerned about the fate of the hostages that remain in Gaza.
Donoghue outlines measures Israel must take
Donoghue outlines measures Israel must take. She says the country must take all measures to prevent acts that could be considered genocidal – such as killing members of a group or inflicting conditions designed to bring about the destruction of a group.
Israel must ensure its military does not commit any genocidal act, she says.
The country must also prevent and punish any comments considered to incite genocide in Gaza.
Israel must also take immediate and effective measures for basic services and humanitarian measures, she says.
Donoghue says Israel must also prevent any destruction of evidence that could be used in a genocide case. Finally, she says Israel must also submit a report to the court within one month of this order.
Court can issue provisional measures, says judge
She rules that the court can issue provisional, emergency measures and notes the measures indicated need not be identical to those requested by South Africa.
She then outlines which of South Africa’s requested measures the court will grant.
She says Israel must desist from killing, injuring, destroying life and preventing births in relation to Palestinians.
These acts fall within the scope of the Genocide Convention, she says.
Israel’s steps to mitigate harm against civilians not enough, judge says
The judge is now reading out some letters and statements by high-ranking UN officials about the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.
Some of these letters observe a breakdown of Gazan society and that the humanitarian crisis is only worsening.
Donoghue says the court considers that the civilian population in Gaza remains extremely vulnerable.
She notes that the Israeli military operation is ongoing and that the prime minister has said the war will take “many months”.
Israel says it has taken efforts to mitigate harm against civilians, the court notes, but while such steps “are to be encouraged”, the judge says they’re not enough.
The humanitarian situation is at serious risk of deterioration before the court renders its final judgement, she says, and therefore there is a sense of urgency here.
Judge delivers bleak assessment of situation in Gaza
Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent
Judge Joan Donoghue has delivered a bleak summary of the suffering experienced by Palestinians, and says the plight of children “is especially heart-breaking”.
She says some of the rights sought by South Africa on behalf of the Palestinians are “plausible”.
It seems likely that she will uphold at least some of South Africa’s nine requests.
Donoghue notes comments made by Israeli ministers
The court hears statements made by Israeli officials, and notes that on 9 October, the defence minister ordered a complete siege of Gaza.
Israel’s Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said he had released all restrictions on fighting against “human animals”, adding: “We will eliminate everything.”
Donoghue continues by reading comments made by Israeli President Isaac Herzog three days later in which he said the military was working according to the rules of international law.
“We are at war,” he says, adding that civilians in Gaza “could have risen up” to remove Hamas, which rules in Gaza.
Donoghue goes on to say that she will be taking public statements such as these into account when dealing with the scope of the case.
At least some of the rights asserted by South Africa – for Gazans to be protected from acts of genocide under the Genocide Convention – do exist, she says.
Judge turns to humanitarian situation in Gaza
The judge is now turning to the humanitarian situation on the ground in Gaza.
She quotes UN emergency relief coordinator Martin Griffiths, who says “Gaza has become a place of death and despair”.
The judge says 1.7 million people have been displaced in Gaza and the enclave has become “uninhabitable”.
She notes, however, that the numbers coming out of Gaza can’t be independently verified.
1.4 million people are now in UN shelters where they lack everything, she says.
She also notes the commissioner-general for the UN relief agency for Palestinian refugees has said the crisis in Gaza is compounded by inhumane language.
She quotes some example of statements to this effect by senior Israelis.
Israel loses procedural question
Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent
Judge Joan Donoghue has not dismissed the entire case, as Israel has demanded. She said there was sufficient evidence of a dispute between Israel and South Africa and that South Africa has standing to bring the case.
She has moved on to examine the question of whether any of the nine provisional measures demanded by South Africa are justified.
South Africa has legal standing to bring case, says judge
ICJ president Judge Donoghue continues by discussing the legal standing of South Africa in its ability to bring this case.
Israel did not object to South Africa’s standing, she says, adding that any party to the Genocide Convention can bring a case against another state.
South Africa has standing to submit the dispute with Israel concerning alleged violations of obligations under the convention, she states.
Court has jurisdiction to consider case, judge says
Donoghue continues on the issue of whether the court has jurisdiction in this case – essentially whether it can make orders.
In particular, she is looking at whether there is a dispute between South Africa and Israel, and is setting out the legal framework the court is applying to it.
She notes that South Africa has previously made public comments suggesting that Israel may have acted contrary to its obligations under the genocide convention.
She further notes Israel has dismissed any notion of genocide in Gaza.
The parties hold opposite views regarding Israel’s obligation, she says.
Therefore, there is a dispute between the two parties. South Africa considers Israel to be responsible for genocide in Gaza.
The judge says at least some of the acts and omissions appear to fall within the genocide convention.
She concludes the court has jurisdiction to consider the case.
ICJ ‘deeply concerned’ by continuing loss of life
Donoghue speaks next about the context that has led to South Africa’s application to the court.
She speaks of the 7 October attack, in which Hamas killed more than 1,200 people, injured thousands and took about 240 people hostage – many of whom are still captive.
Israel then began its military operation, she continues, causing massive civilian casualties, extensive damage to Gaza and displacing the overwhelming majority of the population.
She notes the court is “deeply concerned” by the continuing loss of life and human suffering.
She says that the scope of the present case is limited, and that South Africa and Israel are both parties to the Genocide Convention.
Latest Post
Navigate to the last page