for the convention. see, application of south africa contained a request for the indication of provisional measures submitted with reference to article $41.00 of the statute and to articles $7374.75 of the rules of court. in accordance with the usual practice, i shall not read the introductory paragraphs of the order which set out the procedural history of the case. i feel also omit or summarize some other paragraphs . i shall therefore begin the reading of the order of paragraphs 13 in the order. the court begins by recalling the immediate context in which the present case came before it. it observes that on 7 october 2023, a mouse and other arm groups present in the gaza strip. carried out and attacking israel, killing more than 1200 persons injuring thousands in abducting some 240 people, many of whom continue to be held hostage. following this attack, israel launched a large scale military operation in casa by land, air, and sea, which is causing massive civilian casualties, extensive destruction of

to which i shall refer as the genocide convention for the convention. the application of south africa contained a request for the indication of provisional measures submitted with reference to article $41.00 of the statute and to articles of $7374.75 of the rules of court. in accordance with the usual practice, i shall not read the introductory paragraphs of the order which set out the procedural history of the case. i feel also omit or summarize some other paragraphs . i shall therefore begin the reading of the order a paragraph 13 in the order. the court begins by recalling the immediate context in which the present case came before it. it observes that on 7 october 2023, a mouse and other arm groups present in the gaza strip. carried out and attacking israel, killing more than 1200 persons injuring thousands and abducting some 240 people. many of them continue to be held hostage following this attack. israel launched a large scale military operation in casa by land, air, and sea, which is causing massive civilian casualties, extensive destruction of

to which i shall refer as the genocide convention of the convention.ures, cementing two reference of article _ measures, cementing two reference of article 41— measures, cementing two reference of article 41 of _ measures, cementing two reference of article 41 of the statute and article — article 41 of the statute and article 70 three, 74 and 35 of the rutes— article 70 three, 74 and 35 of the rules of— article 70 three, 74 and 35 of the rules of court. in accordance with the usual— rules of court. in accordance with the usual practice, i shall not read the usual practice, i shall not read the introductory paragraphs of the order_ the introductory paragraphs of the order which set out the procedural history— order which set out the procedural history of— order which set out the procedural history of the case. i shall also omit _ history of the case. i shall also omit or— history of the case. i shall also omit or summarise some other paragraphs. i shall therefore begin the reading of the order at paragraph 13. in the order, the court _ paragraph 13. in

and punishment in the crime genocide to which i shall refer as the genocide convention for the convention of the application of south africa contained a request for the indication of provisional measures submitted with reference to article $41.00 of the statute and to articles $7374.75 of the rules of court. in accordance with the usual practice, i shall not read the introductory paragraphs of the order which set out the procedural history of the case. i feel also omit or summarize some other paragraphs . i shall therefore begin the reading of the order of paragraphs 13 in the order. the court begins by recalling the immediate context in which the present case came before it. it observes that on 7 october 2023, a mouse and other arm groups present in the gaza strip. carried out and attacking israel, killing more than 1200 persons injuring thousands in abducting some 240 people. many of whom continue to be held hostage following this attack, israel launched a large scale military operation in gaza by land, air, and see which is causing massive civilian casualties. extensive destruction of

the court recalls that in accordance with article one of the convention.all states parties thereto have undertaken to prevent and to punish the crime of genocide. article two provides that, i quote, genocide means any of the following acts committed with an intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such. a) killing members of the group, b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, c deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in holler impart, d. imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e. forcing forcibly transferring children of the group to another group, end of quote. pursuing to article 3 of the genocide convention, the following acts are also prohibited by the convention: conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public. incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide. the provisions of the convention are intended to protect the members of national, ethnical, rac

i shall refer to this. convention as the genocide convention, to found the jurisdiction of the court, south africa invokes article 36, paragraph one of the statute of court and article 9 of the genocide convention. south africa states that its applications concerns acts threatened, adopted, condoned, taken and being taken by the government and military of israel against the palestinian people, a distinct national, racial and ethnical group, in the wake of the attacks in israel on. and is committing genocide, and which has also violated and continues to violate other fundamental obligations under the genocide convention. the application contains a request for the indication of provisional measures, pursuing to article 41 of the statute of court, and articles 73, 74 and 75 of the rules of court. according to south africa, i quote, provisional measures are necessary in this case to protect against further, severe and reparable harm to the rights of the palestinian people under the genocide convention, which continued to be violated with impunity. south africa requests that the court indi

as the court knows, the convention prohibits the destruction of a group, or part of that group, including through killing, causing serious bodily and mental. and inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group's physical destruction. through these core rights, the convention further protects the rights of its members to life and physical and mental integrity. palestinians in gaza, women, men, children, because of their membership in a group, are protected by the convention, as is the group itself. and the core rights. are violated and threatened by a remarkable set of facts outlined by my colleagues and set out in detail in south africa's application with supporting evidence. in the speeches to this court today, south africa has chosen, as you've heard, to avoid the showing of graphic videos and photos. it is decided against turning this court into a theater for spectacle. it knows, as well as your excellencies, the temptation for. both sides in a dispute to parade pictures to shock, but south africa's application in this court today is built a foundation of clear legal

and punish others who engage in or insight or actively support conduct that violates the genocide convention. until the reported intervention of the attorney general 36 hours ago, israeli authorities appear to have done practically nothing to stop the flow of genocidal rhetoric, including statements emanating from the ranks of public officials. indeed, the toler. even normalization of such incitement has become a matter of concern within israel itself, and that is why this measure is sort. this case is important, lives are at stake, israel's credibility and reputation are at stake. yet evidence that could determine whether or not particular acts violate the genocide. convention is being lost or destroyed, while factfinders and foreign journalists are unable to report freely from gaza, hence the seventh request, which is for an order directing the preservation of evidence. and finally, south africa asks that the court require specific reports from israel on what it is doing implement the order. general assurances are not enough, reports published via the court are an essential element of acco

i shall refer to this convention as the genocide convention to found the jurisdiction of the court south africa invokes article $36.00 paragraph one of the statute of court. and article 9 of the genocide convention. south africa states that its applications concerns acts threatened, adopted, condoned, taken and being taken by the government and military of israel against the palestinian people. a distinct national, racial and ethnic will group in the wake of the attacks in israel on 7 october 2023 . says africa contends that the accident emissions by israel, of which he complains or genocidal in character because i quote they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the palestinian national, racial and ethnic will group that thing. the parts of the palestinian group in the gaza strip and of called south africa asserts that the relevant acts are attributable to israel, which has failed to prevention aside and is committing genocide and which has also violated and continues to violate other fundamental obligations under the genocide convention, as the apple occa

_ infringement in terms of the convention.— infringement in terms of the convention. , . , ., conventionm to the rules laid down by the court today?— conform to the rules laid down by the court today? i have never really been ho -e the court today? i have never really been hope about _ the court today? i have never really been hope about israel— the court today? i have never really been hope about israel but - the court today? i have never really been hope about israel but israel. been hope about israel but israel has very— been hope about israel but israel has very powerful— been hope about israel but israel has very powerful friends - been hope about israel but israel has very powerful friends who . been hope about israel but israel has very powerful friends who i l been hope about israel but israel- has very powerful friends who i hope will advise _ has very powerful friends who i hope will advise israel— has very powerful friends who i hope will advise israel they— has very powerful friends who i hope will advise israel they should - has very powerful friends who i hope will advise i

and is a state party to the genocide convention itself. it is entitled to safeguard compliance with that instrument. as this being explained, the events unfolding and gaza at the hands of these riley forces, or frightening the unprecedented if what this court is being off to do in these proceedings, interdicting genocidal acts on an interim basis is sadly by no means level in relation to genocide the court has indicated provisional him is an analogous circumstances to these in the can be a case where as to the state sort provisional measures on the basis of the book on those right, that the genocide convention be complied. this also in respect of genocide, the court did the same in the bosnia and ukraine cases. and most recently, this court further accepted the big on this character of parties rights in relation to the torture convention. so south africa respects the contents that in this case, the rights of the palestinians in gaza on no less worthy of this quote's considerable protective power. and the article $41.00 to issue provisional

they do not fall within the limits of the genocide convention. for the stunned arts of irreparable harm and urgency is not to move either is ro is constantly taking concrete steps together with others to address the many, terry and situation in gaza. 5, finally, we have shown that each of the provisional measures thoughts are unwarranted and prejudicial. all these requires that we give attention to 2 fundamental matters arising from these proceedings. the 1st is that the applicant seeks to portray an image of israel as the lawless state. that the regard itself beyond and above the law of the applicant, springs to an image of israel as a state in which the entire public service, military and society having concert, discarded. israel's long spending commitment to law and morality and become single, literally consumed with this drawing and an entire population. that is probably false. i can attest to that 1st hand as the deputy attorney general for international law. in this position, i regularly advise the government on issues of international law,

it's part of the genocide convention. these managers directly linked to the rights that from the subject matter of stuff topic that's disputes with each one. the state of his final check show immediate suspend it submitted to the operations been and against casa to the state of israel, shut and show that any made a treat uh, irregular units which may be directed, supported or influenced by it, as well as any organizations. and presidents, which may be subject to its control, direction or influence. take no steps in fact that any of the military operations. but if at 2 in point one above $330.00 popular club south africa and the state of his shot each in accordance with the obligations under the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide in relation to the publishing and people take reasonable measures within their power to prevent the genocide for the state of israel shaw quoted. and so with this publication is found at the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide in r

and of course, pursuing to article 3 of the genocide convention. the following acts are also prohibited by the convention conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit then, genocide, attempt to commit genocide and complicity from genesis. so the provisions of the convention are intended to protect the members of a national ethnical racial or religious group. from acts of genocide or any other punishable acts enumerated in article 3. the court considers that there is a correlation between the rights of our members of groups protected under the genocide convention. the obligations incumbent on state parties there too, and the right of any state party to seek compliance there with by another state party. as the court has stated, in other cases, in order for acts to fall within the scope of article 2 of the convention, the intent must be to destroy at least a substantial part of a particular group. this is demanded by the very nature of the crime of genocide. since the object and purpose of the convention as a full is to preven

under the genocide convention. i'm that south africa express concerns over the genocide allegation would have been this waged. we've made enough, i know south africa's pacific, so it's institution of proceedings foreclosed. that's option. it's a point with underlining south africa did not give israel a reasonable opportunity to engage with it on the mattress under consideration before filing it. no doubt loan application on one does web itself efforts. at the very last moment, stephanie realized that it needed to show the existence of a dispute under the terms of the genocide convention and procedure to hastily formulate and dispatched a flurry of notes for quote, from parental orders for provisional measures, only were the provisions relied upon by the applicants, a prime, the fe shay to afford the basis on which is jurisdiction could be found. although it need not sauces, find itself and a definitive mind, but it has to is fiction. as regards the merits of the case is nothing easy month to determine whether a pri

and that the allied powers barone parties to the convention without reservation. while the axis powers were not supposed as a neutral station for proceedings against the allied powers alleging branches of the genocide convention. and they come doctor facilities and requesting provisional measures requiring the allies to see saw still the seas immediately inviting pictures of civilian fatalities and suffering in the war. as a plausible claims, such provisional measures would have required the allies to surrender should the axis powers. even though the case against the might laser of being held to be wholly unfounded without any consideration by the court of where the genocide was being committed by the acts as powers, provisional measures must have their limits. could the provisional measure require a state to change its government or to vote in a particular way in the general assembly? the onset must be the can provisional measures require a state to refrain from exercising a plausible right to defend itself. the answer must be the same. in this case, the balance

under the convention. the consequences of north indicating the and particularized specific provisional measures and not taking steps to intervene while it is out of district thoughts, its international obligations before our eyes. woods, we fear be very brave indeed for the palestinians in gaza, who remain at the rear risk of further to the sidelines for the integrity of the convention for the rights of south africa. and for the reputation of this quote, which is equipped with muscles exercises powers to afford an effective plan is ation of the lights under the convention. that means with respectfully supplements indicating the provision of managers being sold, spice, south africa, as well as any others. in addition, which the quote might deem appropriate justice and equal respect for the rights of palestinians. points where mainly in favor of these critically required provision. i'm anxious but i'm president. i know proceeds to read the major's requested by south africa. on the basis of the effects set fo

is clear from its placement in article one of the convention. article 9 of the genocide convention makese guardians of the genocide convention. unlike other treaties designed to protect human rights, it does not oblige states to pursue negotiations as a prelude to approaching this court. it does not treat the ending of genocidal acts as a bilateral affair between states. instead, it envisages a situation in which a state, acting on behalf of the international community as a whole seizes the jurisdiction of the court as a matter of urgency. to prevent genocide. south africa has a long history of close relations with israel. for this reason, it did not bring the dispute immediately to the attention of the court. it watched with horror as israel responded to the terrible atrocities committed against his people on 7 of october, with attack on gaza that resulted in the indiscriminate. of innocent palestinian civilians, most of whom were women and children. the south african government repeatedly voiced its concerns in the security council and in public statements that israel's actions had bec

conventions were increased to 13 conventions, that air wars are the type of actions that took place at the end of the first world war, when the planes were placed in the war zone and the shelters were attacked and attacked by themselves. in reality, the space has changed a bit and the process of dealing with war crimes and genocide has changed based on the type of courts that were created in the past from versailles and nuremberg.

the biggest fight in the philadelphia convention, the wind that almost ended the convention was whether in one house of the national government you would apportion representation based on population or based on each state having the same equal representation and they argued about that for five or six weeks and the small state representative said, if we don't have the quality in one branch of the national government, we are going home and the large state delegate said, no, of course, it should be, we are representing people, so every state should have representation, a portion according to population and then they made theoretical arguments to justify those positions so the small state or said, look, we are going to be discriminated against, the three large states, massachusetts, virginia will ganged up on sms to respond about the three large states don't have anything in common. they come from different parts of the union. they have different economic interests and they have different religious traditions, so they made theoretical arguments but at the end of the day, this was a dispute

this convention as the genocide convention. to found the jurisdiction of the court, south africa invokes article $36.00 paragraph, one of the statute of court. and article 9 of the genocide convention, south africa states that its applications concerns acts threaten, adopted, condoned taken and being taken by the government and military of israel against the palestinian people. a distinct national racial in ethnical group in the wake of the attacks and israel on 7. okay, we're just going to stop there for a moment on some of the testimonies come from the at both countries. so the forgotten issue. we'll cross back to them on when the judges in question is also speaking at we'll have the latest from the hague. but in the meantime, and we've got some live reaction now to bring you on the program, one of the signatories and date to the site. the african lawsuit, jonathan at pollock, joining us from tel aviv at jonathan, you're most welcome to the program. we've just been hearing the, the 1st opening steps there, all the dots at las

the annapolis convention mentioned where did the idea to have the annapolis convention come from? well, i know this. we'll then jump in then. yeah, well, i know if this is the answer you're looking for, i'm looking for the writing. yeah. so? so let's see. i think it's yes. and i in what, 1785, a trade of a smaller conference that's held at i mt. vernon. yes. i can always tell. that jack mention the moon compare. yeah. yeah. if you're coming navigation right. if you come here often enough you know when there's a certain light in doug's eyes he answer has to be george washington or mount vernon. and then you have to work way back to what is this good? do they do the mount vernon, of course, was an agreement between, maryland and virginia, about how to do the commercial rights of the potomac river. and it was necessary because of the potomac companies charter, the first company charter in multiples states. and george washington was the first president of the first company chartered. and that happened right here at mount vernon because were supposed to meet in alexandria, the george w

of the convention.he court does not at this stage have to determine whether or not israel has or has not acted contrary to its obligations under the genocide convention. that can only be done at the merits. stage, it's concerned now only with the question of what provisional measures are required pending the court's final decision on the merits. the court's jurisprudence points to five requirements for the ordering of provisional measures. the first is that there should be primer f jurisdiction, and that was addressed by professord. the second is that the... should be a link between the measures requested and the rights underlying the main claim. this requirement is plainly satisfied. the measures request an order that israel does not violate the very right secured by the genocide convention as set out in south africa's application. the third is the plausibility of the rights that are claimed. professor. explained that this is clearly satisfied, the rights claimed are the very core of the convention, no

among these conventions, the salisbury—addison conventions, the salisbury—addison convention is especiallyral. the convention has a number of parts that, in simplifying matters for reasons of time, one is that a government bill with manifesto characteristics will be given a second reading in the house, and we can see that the convention as a number of people concerned about it, and i am preparing a series of papers on this convention at the moment. for my part, ifeel that this convention is engaged here, and accordingly i will not be supporting the amendment to the second reading of the motion in the name of the noble lord, lord german. the convention also has elements concerning the speed with which the house will consider things. the house will consider things. the houseis house will consider things. the house is already assisting the speed of consideration of this bill. we have changed our business around and freed up today for the second reading. three days have been set aside for committee, which given the likely number of amendments that will be tabled, could only work if the house s

critical ruling to israel ordering it to ensure that its soldiers and people adhere to the genocide convention, but stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire which was one of south africa's demands. 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. this is not the court s final ruling on genocide — that s likely to take several years. as she began her ruling, the presiding judge, joan donoghue, confirmed that the court has jurisdiction in the genocide case against israel and would not throw it out, as requested by israel. let's listen to what she had to say. at the present stage of the proceedings the courts are not required to ascertain whether any violations of israel's obligations of the genocide convention have occurred, and this could only be made by the court at the stage of the examination of the merits of the present case. at the stage of making an order on the request for an indication of provisional measures, the task of the court is to establish whether the omission is cap

but the genocide convention is about much more than legal precedent. it is also fundamentally about the confirmation and endorsement of elementary principles of morality of the court records. the 1946 general assembly resolution on the crime of genocide, which make clear that a quote, genocide is a denial of the right to the existence of entire human groups. as homicide is a denial of the right to live of individual human beings. such denial of the rights of existence shops, the conscience of mankind, results in great losses to humanity in the form of culture and of the contributions represented by the human groups and this country tomorrow, and to the spirit and aims of the united nations and folk. notwithstanding the genocide conventions recognition of the need to rid the world to be oh, just scourge of genocide. the international community has repeatedly faint. it's fades. the people of rwanda has had the bosnian people and they're growing yes, prompting this court to take action. it says again by ignoring the early warnings, the brave risk of genoc

we do it with all countries of the world in line with the military conventions.s here, isn't there? south africa is in an election year. there's going to be an election some time after the month of may. the anc record is very poor. the opinion polls haven't looked good to you for months. you've got endemic poverty, you've had power outages, you've had systemic unemployment for many years. you've got service failure on many levels, and now you've got an issue where you can turn to the south african people and say, "vote for us because we've got this international profile "that we haven't had for years." is this part of the anc�*s election campaign? we have signed the genocide convention in 1998 through former president mandela, and it was domesticated by the minister ofjustice here in south africa, mr dullah omar. and we have been vociferous in our campaign for the people of palestine, but now, the situation has escalated. it warranted for us to act and go to the icj. it is not because there are elections. it's because there was an escalation and we have been camp

that year the convention was signed. the convention of 190 is actually 48 and one day before the universal declaration of human rights was even approved by the united nations. the countries that signed this convention , if there is a genocide somewhere in the world and there is a difference of opinion between the governments, they can go to the international court of justice based on the text of the convention and make it a ruling . there is a fact , even if that killing and those violations did not happen in their territory, the procedure of the international court of justice itself in similar cases in relation to nasdachi , like myanmar's nasdachi, like nasdachi, in fact, in besni, the head-brainists of besni have announced that in fact all governments are zainaf, and if this convention is violated, any government can actually file a lawsuit as a victim and zainaf. he cannot tell south africa or any government what it has to do with you . you were not in this land, no, no, this is not a problem, as when the gambia and

is it foundation of the convention? is the problems i spent in the article one of the convinced article 9 to the side convention makes it clear that state parties or guardians of the genocide convention. and as a trophy is designed to protect human rights, it does not obliged states to pursue negotiations as a prelude to approach. and this quote, it says not to treat the indigo of genocide x as a button that pro fair between such instead didn't. this is just a situation in which a state acting or be off of the international community as a whole season figures takes as a quote as it measure of urgency to prevent genocide. so it's definitely does a long history of cause relations with each route for this reason, it should not bring the dispute immediate food to the attention of the court watch for the heart of it. as soon as i responded to the terrible atrocities committed, the guys just people on 7 of october with an attack on guys that that resulted in the end describing it. kidding. well, the innocent palestinians civi

and of course, in view of the fundamental values sought to be protected by the genocide convention . the court considers that the possible rights in question in this proceeding, namely the right of palestinians and the gods of script to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified an article 3 of the genocide convention and the rights of south africa to seek israel's compliance with the latter's obligation under the convention, or of such a nature that prejudice to them is capable of calls causing irreparable harm. during the ongoing conflict senior united nations officials have repeatedly called attention to the risk of further deterioration of conditions in the gaza strip. the court takes note, for instance, of the letter dated 6 december 2023, whereby the secretary general of the united nations brought the following information to the attention of the security council across the health care system in gaza is collapsing. nowhere is safe and gosh, make constant bombarding by the israel defense forces and without shelter or the essentials to survive. i ex

and of course in view of the fundamental values sought to be protected by the genocide convention. the court considers that the possible rights in question in this proceeding, namely the right of palestinians in the gaza strip to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified an article 3 of the genocide convention and the rights of south africa to seek israel's confines with the latter's obligation under the convention, or of such a nature that prejudice to them is capable of call is causing irreparable harm. during the ongoing conflict senior united nations officials have repeatedly called attention to the risk of further deterioration of conditions in the gaza strip. the court takes note, for instance, of the letter dated 6 december 2023, whereby the secretary general of the united nations brought the following information to the attention of the security council. across the health care system in gaza is collapsing. nowhere is safe in gaza. miss constant bombarding by the israel defense forces and without shelter or the essentials to survive. i expect

so what's the genocide convention says? is that disputes under the convention that can be referred to the i c j and the cash flow of the i, c j is quite particular about what the word dispute means. and in particular, it requires some form of engagement between the 2 parties. it does say that because to the i c gen. so the africa relied on this, that the dispute will result when one state says x and the other states as the opposite of the case. so the i, c, j has, we'll say, emphasized that there's going to be some interaction between the 2 states on that disagreement. and it's possible that south africa wasn't careful enough on this step. i simply con on so that on the fact, okay, how fun on the question of genocidal intent to these really said there is no genocide or intent. and that the statements made by is really political, military leaders simply rhetorical, and that we shouldn't ascribe them any important. that there is no evidence basically that there, there is genocidal intent from from israel. yeah. your thoughts

are of such— obligation under the convention are of such a _ obligation under the convention are ofudice to them _ of such a nature that prejudice to them is _ of such a nature that prejudice to them is capable of causing irreparable harm. during the ongoing conflict, _ irreparable harm. during the ongoing conflict, senior united nations officials — conflict, senior united nations officials have repeatedly called attention to the risk of further deterioration of conditions in the gaza _ deterioration of conditions in the gaza strip — deterioration of conditions in the gaza strip. the court takes note for instance _ gaza strip. the court takes note for instance of— gaza strip. the court takes note for instance of the letter dated the 6th of december 2023 were by the secretary general of the united nations— secretary general of the united nations brought the following information to the attention of the security— information to the attention of the security council. i quote, the health— security council. i quote, the health care system is collapsing. nowhere — health care system is co

currently , there is not much to say, but i still want to repeat the convention of the generation of the convention about genocide is clearly defined and one of its clauses is that if someone if he supports the genocide and remains silent, he himself is guilty of that genocide. for now, we are looking for a positive result in our first case, and then it can actually have consequences and signs for the signatories of the convention, and then we can look for other parties who can, for example, because of silence in they should be convicted and accused of being part of this crime, and south africa can enter this phase in the next phase , mr. ambassador. in order to prepare for this question , we are ready to see minutes of this court. madam president, distinguished members of the court, it is an honor and a privilege for me to appear before you today on behalf of the republic of south africa. i wish to express my gratitude to the court for convening this hearing on the earliest possible date to entertain south africa's request for the indication of provisional measures. this matter, in

as one of the heaviest conventional bombing campaigns in the history of modern warfare, palestinians in gaza are being killed by israeli weaponry and bombs from air, land and sea. they are also at immediate risk of death by starvation, dehydration and disease, as a result of the ongoing siege by israel, the dis destruction of palestinian towns, the insufficient aid being allowed through to the palestinian population, and the impossibility of distributing this limited aid while bombs fall. this conduct renders essentials to life unobtainable. at this provisional measures stage, as this court has made clear in the gambia, our case, it is not necessary for the court to come to final view on the question of whether israel's conduct constitutes genocide. it is necessary to establish only whether at least some of the acts alleged are capable of falling within the provisions of the convention. on analyzing the specific and ongoing genocidal acts complain. off, it is clear that at least some, if not all of these acts fall within the convention's provisions. these acts are documented in detai

or are being - committed, but it does have to show that the genocide convention is in play.s. we are only concerned with genocide. it is indeed a difficult balance for the court.

article to of the convention by committing actions that full within the definition of genocide. the actions show a systematic pattern of conduct from which genocide can be input. allow me to place these acts in context. garza is one of the 2 constituent territories of the occupied palestinian territories occupied by israel since 1967. it is a narrow strip of approximately 365 square kilometers as depicted in the matter now. displayed israel continues to exercise control over the space, territorial watches, land crossings, more to electricity, electromagnetic sphere, and civilian infrastructure in gaza. as well as of a key governmental functions. as the hon minister has said, and fee and exists are, is a and see to gaza is prohibited with real operating b. o need to crossing points. garza, which is one of the most densely populated places in the world, is home to approximately 2300000 palestinians. almost half of them children for the past 96 days is where it has subjected godsa to what has been described as one of the heaviest, conventional bombing campaigns in the history of mo

with it based on this convention. i believe that what hamas has done is very harmful and the hostages should be released soon. the voice of the questioner is not very clear. do you hope that a political solution will be found to solve this problem? yes, i hope that the processes will be as before. go so we can. we should reach a two-state solution in palestine. i think that this issue will not end today or tomorrow, but efforts must be made and trials and errors must be made so that people do not wait in this field, and we all must obey the laws. let us respect the international community if a way is opened for something to be done, but if this does not happen , we will see that a way will be opened for those who can violate international laws in all conflicts. you have seen the speech of the minister of foreign affairs of south africa in front of the hague court let me know what happened today that the laha court has its jurisdiction to investigate. he accepted gaza and considered south africa's evidence and the evid

south africa has taken the step to invoke the genocide convention and charge israel in the international court of justice. while there are severe limitations to this process, it is undeniably..." momentous to see israel brought before the highest international court to answer for its crime of genocide against the palestinians. the relationship between south africa and palestine is deep and cannot be underestimated. it was forged through oppression and racial subjugation. israel was key player in the development and later the malignancy of apartite rule in south africa. south africa's aparthy prime minister daniel molan was the first foreign prime minister. to visit tel aviv following the nakba. hendrick veerd, a south african apartide architect and prime minister, even claimed in 1961 that israel, like south africa, is an apartite state. that was six decades before amnesty international said the same. in order to improve the image of apartide in south africa, israel and the apartite authorities established a joint secretariat for political and psychological warfare in 1975. by 1981, the

he did -- it did under the genocide convention. >> these two are very different cases.l that the case ukraine brought against russia, they said that russia's claiming we are committing genocide and they are claiming that is why they have a right to engage in this invasion of ukraine, and we want the court to say that that is not correct, that there is no act of genocide, and that russia's invasion is not justified by any claims of genocide. that is what the court did say. it said, look, there is no credible allegations of genocide against ukraine, and therefore the invasion cannot be justified in that way. this is a very different case. this is a case where south africa is alleging that israel is committing genocide in the courts of its war in gaza. but it doesn't challenge, and i don't think certainly the court doesn't challenge the right of israel to defend itself in light of the attacks by hamas. so israel does have a legitimate right of self-defense against hamas, and the court was not questioning that. but he was saying you will have to wage that war in a way that

israel has breached the genocide convention with its campaign in gaza. however, as the hearing was taking place, israel attacks civilian locations in two separate countries, ambulance and health services building in south lebanon in the town of hanen and civilians squeeing for food in gaza. at least 32 palestinians, including women, children and men, were then killed by the israeli army in hanyunus southern gaza strip with an air strike. during the international court of justice session. clearly unashamed of israel's warmungering ways, israeli lawyers took to the international court of justice the following day to further attempt to justify the unjustifiable. israel's lawyer malcolm shaw from leicester university in britain came across as unorganized and arrogant. someone has shuffled my papers, he grumbled as he staggered through his address. a widely criticized move to place when western news channels that ignored south africa's presentation at the international court of justice live streamed israel's response to it an act of censorship by omission the