On Thursday and Friday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will consider new urgent measures requested by South Africa in response to the Israeli offensive in Rafah.
On 10 May, the Republic of South Africa asked the ICJ to grant new measures on the grounds that the Israeli offensive in Rafah has caused irreparable harm to the rights of the people of Gaza.
The ICJ announced that hearings on 16 and 17 May will consider South Africa’s request to the Court for further urgent measures against Israel for its attacks on Rafah, as part of the ongoing case accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians.
South Africa’s application stated that new measures should be ordered against Israel on the grounds that the ICJ’s orders of 26 January and 28 March did not reflect the deteriorating conditions and new facts in Gaza and Rafah. The application said Israel had persistently failed to comply with the Court’s orders and continued its “egregious violations” in Gaza.
“Israel’s military operations in Rafah and elsewhere in Gaza are themselves genocidal,” the application said, stressing that the Court should do more than order Israel to comply with the injunctions and its obligations under the Genocide Convention. The application asked the Court to order Israel to cease its military operations.
In January, the Court did not order Israel to stop its attacks as a precautionary measure.
The request stated that Israel had seized the Kerem Abu Salim (Shalom) crossing, the last place of refuge for civilians in Gaza, and had taken de facto control of entry and exit to and from Gaza, and that Israel had prevented humanitarian aid from reaching 1.5 million Gazans.
The new measures demanded were as follows:
1- Israel will cease its military attacks at Rafah and withdraw immediately.
2 – Israel will immediately take all effective measures to ensure and facilitate unhindered access to Gaza for non-governmental organisations, including United Nations agencies, researchers and journalists, to assess the situation in Gaza and to ensure the preservation and collection of evidence, and to ensure that its army does not act in a manner that prevents access.
3- Within one week of the announcement of the new measures, Israel shall provide the Court with an accessible report describing the measures it has taken to implement both the previous measures and the new measures requested.
Israel has previously dismissed South Africa’s genocide case as unfounded, claiming that it is acting in accordance with international law in Gaza, with Tel Aviv accusing Pretoria of acting as the “legal arm of Hamas”.
Will Egypt intervene?
Egypt announced its intention to intervene in the case after Israel seized the Rafah border crossing.
In a statement posted on the Facebook page of the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it was stated that the decision to intervene came as a result of the escalation in the severity and scope of Israeli attacks against Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip, the continuation of systematic practices, including direct attacks against the Palestinian people, the destruction of infrastructure, the displacement of Palestinians from their lands, and the unprecedented humanitarian crisis that has made the Gaza Strip uninhabitable.
Egypt urged Israel to fulfil its obligations as an occupying power, to implement the interim measures issued by the ICJ, and to refrain from any violations against the Palestinian people, a protected people under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the statement said.
The statement also called on the United Nations Security Council and international parties to take immediate action to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza, halt military operations at Rafah and provide the necessary protection to Palestinian civilians.
It was previously announced that Nicaragua, Colombia and Libya had requested intervention under Articles 62 and 63 of the Court’s Charter.
Under Article 83 of its Rules of Procedure, the Court had invited South Africa and Israel to submit written observations on Colombia’s application for intervention.
