welcome to spotlight. the international court of justice has issued a preliminary rooming a genocide case brought by south africa against the israeli regime. the un top court has ordered israel to take all measures necessary to prevent genocide in the gaza strip. the world court also called on israel to prevent and punish incitement of. genocide against palestinians by israeli officials and political figures. palestinians have welcomed the ruling as an important development that is in favor of humanity in international law. the icj however, has failed to call for a cease fire in the besieged and war-torn palestinian territory. will this ruling help ease the sufferings of palestinians, as israel has been quick to defy it, vowing to press ahead with its onslot on gaza. our guests for tonight's spotlight are: zakir

ahmad mahit, attorney activist and political analyst joining us from johannesburg, and also we have podcaster and journalist esha krishnaswami joining us from st. petersburg. welcome to the program, to the both of you, let's start off with mr. ahmed mit in johannesburg, now a historic ruling indeed from an international trib. against the israelis in the words of the south african president, after decades of occupation, aparty and aggression, the palestinian cries for justice have been heated. what do you make of the icj ruling? i believe this is a tremendous victory. think i wear two hats, one as a person from the legal fraternity and another as a south african, and as a south african, i'm particularly proud that the best legal minds with south africa together with

the support of the government have taken this particular case to the icj and exposed israel for what it is, the genocidal colonial settler state. the second part is the legal implications. this is a tremendous victory, and if you look at it objectively, effectively, when you look at what was asked for in the papers by the south african government, approximately, i would say 80% if i have to estimate was given to the south africans. in terms of the relief sort, israel, yes it is not calling for a cease fire, however, i believe that the purpose of the genocide convention is to stop genocidal acts, not conflict in itself, and this is a differentiation that was raised by israel at some point, however the bulk of what was quoted by the speaker justice donahu was from the south african government's papers, so this is a tremendous it exposes israel for

what it is, it places the legal sword on the neck of israel and it now compels them to change the methodology within gaza, and we know that they have nothing else in the arsenal other than genocide, becomes very difficult position and opens up numerous avenues against those that are supporting israel and its genocide, therefore tremendous victory and i believe it should be viewed as such as: in st. petersburg, this is considered as a historic ruling from an international tribunal against the israelis, but many are still uh saying that it fell short of calling for sessation of hostilities by the israelies, why did the court stop short of making that call in your opinion? i don't know why the court made uh fell short, but in one in one way this is victory because they call... called for the seization of acts

of genocide, so um, generally cease fire is done when there is an arm conflict between two parties, genocide is not an armed conflict between two parties, it is one party trying to wipe out the other party from existence, so the ruling in some ways goes further than calling for a cease fire, um, but of course um, generally speaking, the icj does cannot just call a cease fire on one party, so they'll have to call for a cease fire on both parties, and so i think that is why they stopped short of calling for a sice fire. all right, mr. ahmed mayat, following the icj session, south africa said the ruling is binding and it must be respected by all states. well, israely prime minister beniamin a netanyahu was defined even before there was a ruling, and he said, if you recall... that

nobody can stop us, not the hague and not anybody else, words spoken just like what a blood thirsty war criminal would say, now in reaction to today's ruling, he called the order a disgrace uh that won't be erased for generations and vowed to continue the onslot. so what happens next? i think we can expect more massacers, we can expect greater brutality from the zionist entity. it has been clear that the zionist entity would not abide by the rulings of the icj, israel has always been a belligerant state. "it has been very clear in terms of numerous un resolutions and it's conduct over the many years, that is exactly what president said when he addressed the nation here in south africa this afternoon that this is an apparated state, so it comes as no surprise

that they will exercise their belligerance, if the and i think it goes back to expectation, the expectation by those that were part of the league." fraternity on our part of the legal fraternity is that we would not have even gotten victory considering the composition of the bench, that was our apprehension, when you look at the countries, the countries with the united states, there was germany, there was japan, uganda pulled through as ally of israel, morocco as well, so we were very concerned about the composition of the bench when we looked at it, however what you are seeing is that even in international law was clear on this point that israel is committing a genocide, so the the rhetoric that we are getting out of israel is in keeping with its nature, hence my previous point is that israel is in a very difficult position because they only have the card of genocide to play, the dahia doctrine

that is currently in operation in ghaza, it was utilized in lebanon in 2006 develop by major generalt and gora island is still being utilized in gaz today. "i think that we will continue to see this, and our expectation should not be that israel would abide by it and that they would stop hostilities towards the palestinians. the difference now is that one of the most prominent international bodies has ruled that on the face of it israel is committing genocide and that it must stop, there's also a specific reference consistently, and i've heard this approximately three times in justice dony'. was giving the ruling was the reference to prevention of pregnancies and births within razza, so this constant reference underscores how serious the attack is upon the palestinian people leveled by israel, so when we look at the situation, i think we must be reasonable in our expectations, but the true

take away from this is that israel's mask has fallen and it is now being exposed for what it truly is, and it opens the doors for other legal action. against israel and those who support israel and its genocidal acts in gaza. miss krishna swami, we come now to the issue of compliance. palestinian assistant foreign minister has called on all states to ensure that the top un courts orders are completely enforced, so what happens if and when the israelis refuse to abide by the world court's ruling. in the words of the south african foreign minister, if israel doesn't come. comply then we're opening up room for more abuses taking place in future conflicts and very dangerous precedent will be set. unpack that for us please. well the first thing is um technically what usually happens when there's non-compliance is that

this can be brought forth by the un security council for not in compliance, but we all know the five parties that have the unilateral veto power in any un security council resolution so we... that the us will probably veto any kind of further sanctions or orders in order to bring israel to come to compliance um and thus it will call to question the rules-based international order that the us always likes to out and it will show that the us is willing to destroy this alleged rules-based international order when it doesn't suit them. that's the first thing. can you just repeat the? second question again please? yeah, so uh the second part was that the south african foreign minister speaking following uh the icj ruling set that if israel doesn't comply we're opening up room for more abuses to take place in future conflicts and very dangerous precedent will

be set. he is absolutely right. um she sorry she is absolutely right in this regard because um lot of countries have signed to these conventions because they have said there is a line to which we cannot have armed conflict and the world needs to step in and this will and another conc'. is that many countries have various provisions that triggered certain kind of actions in their own laws when there are acts of genocide, and so another consequence is that this may trigger provisions within many countries laws that need to be act enacted to prevent genocide, so i think in that way israel will be further isolated from the world, and hopefully that will lead to change. right, mr. ahmed may. "the israelis have been a rogue entity since day one, but what about

the western countries that back the israelis, the self-proclaimed beacons of democracy and worldly order. now palestinian foreign minister riad al-maliki said the icj ruling is an important reminder that no one is above the law and the order serves as a wake-up call for israel and its allies who have enabled the regime's impunity. now those allies have to be thinking twice about the pressure that this ruling..." could have for them as well if they continue to support this massacre. the first country that comes to mind is the us. what's your take on that? few things uh that are part of the question that i need to unpack. the palestinian foreign minister that is being referred to is part of the palestinian authority. there is pending case, it was on jurisdiction before the icc with regards to israel in its conduct during the 2014 war south africa. also made submissions in this regard and the the one sticking point was whether or not

jurisdiction can be founded because the palestinian authority which is formed by oslow outs the jurisdiction and brings it to localized level and prevents international international instruments from getting involved. now the election was supposed to be for the palestinian authority to decide whether or not to abandon oslo or to stand by it. which they have oscillated between agreeing and disagreeing, so i find it rich coming from the palestinian foreign minister, that being said, when we look at the the other groupings, we look at the united states, for example, the united states, anthony blincon and admiral kirby have said in numerous time, numerous occasions that these are baseless allegations, it becomes quite embarrassing for them now when their own their own candidate. that the icc or rather icj um has indicated that no, there's

a case of genocide here, it does show one thing though that the legal minds that are sitting on the icj have put law above politics, with the exception of uganda, that's very clear and as well as with the case of israel, those are the two exceptions, so the rest of the world it's very very clear that there is a genocide taking place on the face of it based on the information that has been presented and this has broad implications for those that are arming the party committing the genocide, that is the united states, they have committed 20 special forces to the ground, they have, i think it was yesterday that i picked up the stat that over 100 shipments of weapons have already gone to israel, there's been an announcement of new weapon systems being delivered to israel and sold to israel, and this places the united states squarely within the group of countries. supporting genocide, the legal implications are tremendous, because now is

justifications to sees diplomatic activities, there's justifications in terms of povestment and sanctions and it justifies numerous actions that can be taken in terms of isolating these countries, there is legal basis for this now, not just a political rhetoric or emotion that is usually just... used to justify these actions, you have legal standing now. esha krishna swami, the palestinian resistance moven hamas says, the icj ruling on south africa's genocide case against israel contributes to the regime's isolation. now, if this ruling can't be implemented by force, then do you think it could be used as a stepping stone for other countries and other regional blocks to start isolating israel and taking action against the israelis. for example, islamic blocks enforcing sanctions or uh, maybe even uh arab

governments stopping any normalization deals with the israelis? absolutely, um, especially because it proves, if this enforced action cannot be enforced via the un security council, it shows how rig the system is, and many other countries, after that will look for alternative blocks and avenues to form, maybe something like the bricks. or who knows um so i think that when other so other when this happens israel has is a participant in the world market and they have to trade goods. and if it becomes harder and harder, just yesterday i read that insurance companies won't insure many israeli ships because through the red sea because of what the actions of the ansarella army in yemen, so these will add up in order to create a significant change like it did in south africa. right, and mr. ahmed mayat, the system is rigged, that's what our guess in

st. petersburg uh believes and we know that there's this notion that the icj doesn't have the power. to enforce its ruling, so where does that leave a ruling like this, if it might not be turned into tangible action, and do you think that this exposes the lack of a proper mechanism to deal with these types of situations? this comment has been passed by foreign minister naled panda of south africa, that it requires numerous countries to sit around the table and reevaluate these mechanisms. international law, unfortunately is prem. on reciprocity, so you have to consent to certain things with the backing of the united states, which is in itself a colonial power which has been traversing through the middle east committing massacre and massacre in genocide of genocide, it comes as no surprise that they would try and protect the little illegitimate state of israel as it tries to massacre a population

and exert itself uh on the ground, this is just attempt, to expand israel's borders and eliminate the palestinian people, this is clearly what has been said and this is clearly what is happening. that being said, going forward, what is it going to do? it's going to topple the entire system, as we know it, israel, united states find themselves increasingly isolated, this was very clear in the coalition that they try to build with regards the ansar allah, and then you had numerous countries out and stating that they will not put their vessels under us control, so i think that we are heading towards a restructuring, as my final panelist has said, is that it's going to force countries to look at alternatives and i think the system has been grossly unsustainable as the years have gone by, and a perfect example of this is the conduct of israel through the years, it is

precisely this, the apartate nature of israel that has been allowed to exist that... made reference to today, it is precisely that which is made reference to on page two of the application that was made by south africa of the 84 pages, and it is consistently mentioned in the statements by those representing south africa, so i think that this has been a failure that this has real its head again in the international community, and if there is implementation of the icj's instructions. "i believe that we will see a gross unmasking of all of these regimes and it will open up further avenues for justice to be sort by the people, not just of palestine, but i think of the general global south. miss krishna swami, observers are saying this case could be defining moment for the genocide convention, it could finally empower the genocide convention, or render it

moot all together. what do you think? i think it's absolutely true. um another thing is that um, i think it's absolutely true because if the icj can rule that there are acts of geneside and nothing happens despite the entire purpose of the icj when it was formed in 1945 was to quote and quote the slogan never again, it kind of will show that only there isn't an equal standard for genocide and this will think. happen again and again, so they are absolutely right. top of that, i think the israel has been playing the card of victim because they somehow trace their lineage back to the holocaust when we know that the hagana and the iragun were there way before 1939, they were committing acts of terror in the early 30s, so it it shows that

israel is the aggressor here and they cannot hide behind the victim card from 70 years. ago, so that is another step that i see from this ruling additionally. number of western and european countries were supporting israel and the case, you also alluded to some of them, for example, germany, and their presumed pressure and lobbying seemed to fall short, because in almost all of the provisions read at today's ruling, there was clear majority of judges ruling against the israelis, number of 15 to twos and a couple of 16 to one. out of panel of 17, so with how things are going, do you think that the icj is tilting towards actually making this landmark ruling in favor of the south africa. case officially ruling that israel has carried out what is being called the crime of all crimes, the crime of genocide. i think

that one of the other aspects that were on trial is not just israel, but also the international system, and the judges were on trial. if we look at what you have spoken about in terms of the statistics, and this is the challenge that is within the legal fraternity, do... you follow your own opinions or do you follow the facts and that was our concern, all of the legal fraternity was concerned that it would be state policy that would superseed the facts on the ground, and what we saw is a true commitment to the principles of law that the facts would dictate the outcomes with the exception of course of israel's justice barak and the ugandan ugandan justice sibutini, my apologies sabotendi, julia sabutendi, so these two individuals had followed politics, whereas the rest of the world's justices indicated that they have to follow principle,

and i think that is also a bit of a triumph that the palestinian cause has become the listmus test for the international system, the effectiveness of the international system is a different question completely, but those figures that you've just mentioned, 15 to2, 16 to one, especially on the issue i found particularly shocking, was to hold accountable those that have been involved in incitement, even baraq then voted for this, which meant that individuals like benjamin netanyahu, gallant, the defense minister, these individuals would have to be brought to account before a court of law, this is incredible, all right, that's all the time we have for tonight's show allow me to thank my guest, attorney activists and political analyst, joining us from johannesburg and thanks to podcaster and journalist esha krishna swami joining us from st. petersburg and a special thanks to you our viewers for staying with us tonight spot night. it's good

night for now and see you next time.

العالم شوفه.

10 years of chaos and war in syria. the ruins left in syria, who benefits from the continuation of this war. what is the view of the west, particularly america towards war in syria and the support of many countries for creating chaos in syria? why syria? a different narrative.

every news channel claims that it covers the latest breaking news as we do, so that alone is not what sets press tv apart. what mainstream news outlets conveniently leave outs with breaking news from around the world, we are here to bring to you, we fill in the blanks. we are the other side of the story, the less represented side of the story. we are tellers of inconvenient truth. while they continue to silence our web.