Linked with South Africa case is ongoing accused Israel of violating its obligations under the agreement Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention), new requestfiled May 10, requested ICJ ordered Israel to “immediately withdraw and cease military operations in the Rafah governorate”.
An ‘obscene exploitation’
Appearing before the Court, Gilad Noam, co-representative of Israel, rejected South Africa’s claim, calling it an “obscene exploitation” of the “most sacred” Genocide Convention.
“South Africa presented to the Court for the fourth time in less than five months, a picture that was radically different from the facts and circumstances.”
He stated that Israel is engaged in a “difficult and tragic” armed conflict, a fact necessary to “understand the situation” but ignored by South Africa.
“It makes a mockery of the abhorrent accusation of genocide… facts matter and facts matter. Words must retain their meaning. Calling something genocide over and over again does not mean it is genocide,” he added.
Israel did not start the war
Mr. Noam further stated that it was not Israel that started the war, recalling the “terrible attack” on October 7, 2023 by Hamas and other Palestinian groups that targeted Israeli civilians and communities, killing more than 1,200 people and took 254 women, men and children hostage.
He added that Hamas and other terrorist groups in Gaza continue to attack Israel, displacing communities and destroying homes and infrastructure. Furthermore, Hamas continues to use Palestinian civilians as human shields.
“Rafah, in particular, is the epicenter of ongoing terrorist activity,” he said, accusing Hamas of having a “complex underground tunnel infrastructure” with command and control rooms and equipment. military equipment and the ability to get Israeli hostages out of Gaza. .
He also noted that although the ICJ called for the immediate release of the hostages, they remained detained.
Israel’s co-agent Gilad Noam at a public hearing in the case of South Africa v. Israel at the ICJ.
Not a large-scale operation
“The reality is that any country put in Israel’s difficult position would do the same. The right to protect against the brutality of the terrorist organization Hamas is unquestionable. That is an inherent right of Israel as well as of any country,” Mr. Noam said.
The representative of Israel stated his country’s commitment to defend itself, “in accordance with the law, which is why they have worked hard to protect civilians, even when Hamas deliberately endangers for them”.
“That is why there was not a large-scale attack on Rafah but instead specific, limited and localized operations, prefaced by evacuation and support efforts,” he added. for humanitarian activities”.
Participate fully and sincerely
Concluding his statement, Mr. Noam cited the Court’s rejection of South Africa’s previous requests for similar interim measures, adding that the granting of interim measures in terms such as So it’s “completely inappropriate”.
“South Africa has not provided sufficient reasons why the Court should deviate from or essentially replicate its previous decisions,” he said, noting that Israel “fully and sincerely participated” into the proceedings, “despite the outrageous and defamatory statements made against the country”. .”
“[Israel] has repeatedly demonstrated clearly its firm commitment to its obligations under international law. They did this while the war continued and their citizens were still under attack,” he said.
