Read more
WATCH: Israel claims SA tailored Gaza genocide story to pre-existing narrative
Israel argued that Hamas were intent on “wiping out” Israel and were taking advantage of civilian resources.
Galit Raguan arguing Israel’s case before the International Court of Justice in The Hague on Friday.
Israel has told the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague that it has been unfairly accused of atrocities in Gaza by Hamas.
Galit Raguan, Director of the International Justice Division in the Office of the Deputy Attorney General for International Law in the Ministry of Justice of the State of Israel, argued against South Africa’s claim of genocide in the Palestinian enclave.
On Thursday, during its oral arguments, South Africa told the 15 judges at the Peace Palace in The Hague that Gaza was now a concentration camp where genocide was taking place.
Watch: Attorney for Israel, Galit Raguan, claims Hamas turned public hospitals into terrorist compounds
[WATCH] Attorney for Israel, Galit Raguan, claims Hamas turned public hospitals into terrorist compounds. She tells the ICJ that there is evidence to prove this, when these facilities were searched.#Newzroom405 pic.twitter.com/4DTgHOGafc
— Newzroom Afrika (@Newzroom405) January 12, 2024
South Africa has asked the ICJ to grant interim measures to stop Israel’s attacks in Gaza while it decides on the merits of the genocide accusations.
Tailored story
Raguan claimed South Africa had tailored “its story to a pre-existing narrative”.
She said the charge of genocide was “frankly untenable”, given the efforts by Israel for humanitarian assistance.
“The allegation of intent to commit genocide is baseless. If Israel had such intent, would it delay a ground manoeuvre for weeks, urging civilians to seek safer space, and in doing so sacrifice operational advantage?
“Would it invest massive resources to provide civilians with details on where to go, when to go, and how to leave areas of fighting? Would it maintain a dedicated unit of experts whose sole role is to facilitate aid, and continue to do so despite staff being killed or kidnapped?” Raguan asked.
ALSO READ: ‘There isn’t actually a dispute with SA on genocide’ – Israel
Wiping out Israel
Raguan argued that Hamas were intent on “wiping out” Israel and were taking advantage of civilian resources.
“When a population is ruled by a terrorist organisation that cares more about wiping out its neighbour than about protecting its own civilians, there are acute challenges in protecting the civilian population.
“Those challenges are exasperated by the dynamic and evolving nature of intense hostilities in an urban area where the enemy exploits hospitals, shelters, and critical infrastructure,” she said.
Raguan claimed Israel had not waged war on Gaza civilians but was “protecting them”.
“Israel’s efforts to mitigate the ravages of this war on civilians is the very opposite of intent to destroy them. Intent to commit genocide is not even a plausible inference.”
Showing photos of how Hamas uses schools and hospitals to launch rockets, Raguan argued South Africa did not consider the sheer extent to which Hamas uses civilian infrastructure for military purposes.
Israeli genocide
Dr Christopher Staker questioned South Africa’s claim to the right to ensure the Genocide Convention was not violated.
“It is absurd to suggest that the only way to ensure observance of the Genocide Convention in a military operation is to prevent the operation from being conducted at all. In order, according to South Africa, to secure the humanitarian response and avoid more unnecessary death and destruction. That goes beyond preventing genocide.”
Ceasefire
Staker said the suspension of military operations would give Hamas space to increase their capabilities and pose a greater threat, prejudicing Israel and “encouraging the commission of further terrorist attacks”.
“If granted, the result would be an organisation recognised internationally as terrorist has committed a terrorist atrocity in a territory of a state, and a third state now seeks an order from this court that would prevent the state from responding but would impose no obligation on those responsible for the attack.
“The requested measure would not bring an end to the conflict, only military operations by one part in the conflict,” Staker argued.
Staker argued that the provisional measures that South Africa was seeking were aimed at shutting down the Israeli military operation in Gaza, saying this failed to meet the legal requirement that the rights of both parties be protected.
ALSO READ: ‘Nothing can ever justify genocide’ – Professor Vaughan Lowe
