(Nov. 13, 1974)
The vote of 91 to 22 was taken to uphold a ruling by the Assembly‘s President, Foreign Minister Abdelaziz Bouteflika of Algeria, suspending South African participation.
The United States unsuccessfully challenged the ruling, Which was also opposed by Britain, a number of Western Europeans and South Americans, and some others. Nineteen countries abstained.
Germany has been most prominent in this regard. In 2023 30% of Israel’s military equipment purchases totalling US$326 million came from Berlin. The Scholz government has also been a firm public supporter of Israel’s offensive. “There is only one place for Germany at this time, and that is by Israel’s side,” proclaimed German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to German lawmakers on October 12 last year. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock curtly stated that “It was not the job of politicians to tell the guns to shut up.
Baerbock’s remarks were all the more jarring given the 2006 views of Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who was then serving as Germany’s foreign minister. With puffed up confidence, he claimed then that Europeans and Germans had played a seminal role in ending the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon in “silencing of the guns.”
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, holds public hearings on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Nicaragua in the case Nicaragua v. Germany on 8 and 9 April 2024, at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the seat of the Court. Session held under the presidency of Judge Nawaf Salam, President of the Court.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, holds public hearings on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Nicaragua in the case Nicaragua v. Germany on 8 and 9 April 2024, at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the seat of the Court. Session held under the presidency of Judge Nawaf Salam, President of the Court.
(15.03.2024)
It is recalled that Nicaragua filed an Application instituting proceedings against Germany concerning alleged violations by Germany of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, “intransgressible principles of international humanitarian law” and other norms of general international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly the Gaza Strip (see press release 2024/19).
The hearings will be devoted to the request for the indication of provisional measures
contained in Nicaragua’s Application. Nicaragua asks the Court to indicate provisional measures as a matter of extreme urgency, pending the Court’s determination on the merits of the case, with respect to Germany’s “participation in the ongoing plausible genocide and serious breaches of international humanitarian law and other peremptory norms of general international law occurring in the Gaza Strip”.
(01.03.2024)
It is recalled that Nicaragua filed an Application instituting proceedings against Germany concerning alleged violations by Germany of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, “intransgressible principles of international humanitarian law” and other norms of general international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly the Gaza Strip (see press release 2024/19).
The hearings will be devoted to the request for the indication of provisional measures contained in Nicaragua’s Application. Nicaragua asks the Court to indicate provisional measures as a matter of extreme urgency, pending the Court’s determination on the merits of the case, with respect to Germany’s “participation in the ongoing plausible genocide and serious breaches of international humanitarian law and other peremptory norms of general international law occurring in the Gaza Strip”.
It is recalled that Nicaragua filed an Application instituting proceedings against Germany concerning alleged violations by Germany of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, “intransgressible principles of international humanitarian law” and other norms of general international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly the Gaza Strip (see press release 2024/19).
The hearings will be devoted to the request for the indication of provisional measures contained in Nicaragua’s Application. Nicaragua asks the Court to indicate provisional measures as a matter of extreme urgency, pending the Court’s determination on the merits of the case, with respect to Germany’s “participation in the ongoing plausible genocide and serious breaches of international
humanitarian law and other peremptory norms of general international law occurring in the Gaza
Strip”.
Am 8. und 9. April wird der Internationale Gerichtshof (IGH) im Verfahren gegen Deutschland verhandeln. Nicaragua wirft der Bundesrepublik Beihilfe zum Völkermord im Gazastreifen vor, indem sie Israel politisch, finanziell und militärisch unterstützt sowie die Mittel für das UN-Palästinenserhilfswerk gestrichen habe.
Im Gazastreifen bestehe seit Oktober 2023 „die anerkannte Gefahr eines Völkermordes am palästinensischen Volk“. Deutschland habe durch seine Unterstützung für Israel gegen seine Verpflichtungen aus der Völkermordkonvention verstoßen, heißt es in der Klage Nicaraguas.
Top UN judges will start listening to submissions next month in the case filed by Nicaragua accusing Berlin of facilitating “genocide” in Gaza because of its support for Israel in the war against Hamas, officials say.
Two weeks ago Nicaragua filed a case against Germany before the International Court of Justice, saying Berlin was “facilitating the commission of genocide and… failed in its obligation to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide,” in Gaza.
THE HAGUE, 6 March 2024. South Africa today filed an urgent request with the Court for the indication of additional provisional measures and the modification of the Court’s Order of 26 January 2024 and decision of 16 February 2024 in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
In its new request, South Africa states that it is “compelled to return to the Court in light of the new facts and changes in the situation in Gaza — particularly the situation of widespread starvation — brought about by the continuing egregious breaches of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide . . . by the State of Israel . . . and its ongoing manifest violations of the provisional measures indicated by this Court on 26 January 2024”. It requests the Court to indicate further provisional measures and/or to modify the provisional measures indicated it its Order of 26 January 2024, pursuant to Article 41 of the Statute of the Court and Article 75, paragraphs 1 and 3, and Article 76, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Court, respectively, “in order urgently to ensure the safety and security of 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza, including over a million children”. It urges the Court to do so without holding a hearing, in light of the “extreme urgency of the situation”.
(07.03.2024)
Israel has strenuously denied the genocide allegation, and on Thursday its foreign ministry called on the court to reject South Africa’s latest request.
“South Africa continues to act as the legal arm of Hamas in an attempt to undermine Israel’s inherent right to defend itself and its citizens, and to release all of the hostages,” Lior Haiat, a spokesman for Israel’s Foreign Ministry, said on social media.
It was not immediately clear when the court would respond to the request.
After all, a rise in “Jew hatred” is all but inevitable if you redefine antisemitism, as western officials have recently done via the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s new definition, to include antipathy towards Israel – and at the moment when Israel appears, even to the World Court, to be carrying out a genocide.
The logic of Israel and its supporters runs something like this:
Many more people than usual are expressing hatred of Israel, the self-declared state of the Jewish people. There is no reason to hate Israel unless you hate what it represents, which is Jews. Therefore, antisemitism is on the rise.
THE HAGUE, 1 March 2024. Nicaragua today filed an Application instituting proceedings against Germany before the International Court of Justice for alleged violations by Germany of its obligations deriving from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the “Genocide Convention”), the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, “intransgressible principles of international humanitarian law” and other norms of general international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly the Gaza Strip.
The Applicant states that “[e]ach and every Contracting Party to the Genocide Convention has a duty under the Convention to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide” and that, since October 2023, there has been “a recognised risk of genocide against the Palestinian people, directed first of all against the population of the Gaza Strip”. Nicaragua argues that by providing political, financial and military support to Israel and by defunding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), “Germany is facilitating the commission of genocide and, in any case has failed in its obligation to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide”.
Nicaragua has filed a case at the International Court of Justice against Germany for giving financial and military aid to Israel and for defunding the U.N. Palestinian refugee agency (UNRWA), the U.N.‘s top court said on Friday.
Nicaragua asked the ICJ, also known as the World Court, to issue emergency measures requiring Berlin to stop its military aid to Israel and reverse its decision to stop funding UNRWA.
Berlin – 23 February 2024
Today, a group of German lawyers – representing families of two Gazans – is filing a criminal complaint against German Government officials[1], for the crime of aiding and abetting genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza by providing Israel with weapons and issuing related export permissions. They are supported by civil society organisations ELSC (European Legal Support Center), PIPD (Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy) and Law for Palestine under the Justice and Accountability for Palestine Initiative. The charges are being filed at the Office of the Federal Prosecutor in Karlsruhe (‘Generalbundesanwaltschaft’).
In a historic ruling on 26 January 2024 in the case filed by South Africa against Israel for the crime of Genocide, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered provisional measures against the “serious risk” of genocide and stated that the latter is “plausibly taking place”.
German lawyers representing Gaza Palestinian families have filed a criminal complaint against German officials – including Chancellor Olaf Scholz – for supplying Israel with weapons that they say aid and abet Israel‘s ongoing genocide in their homeland.
Prosecutors from the Federal Prosecutor‘s office in Karlsruhe will examine the case, and if it goes ahead will open an investigation and question government officials including Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, and Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs Annalena Baerbock, Minister of Finance Christian Lindner, and members of the Bundessicherheitsrat, the government body that authorizes Germany‘s arms export licenses.
(Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.)
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with 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 whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.
Article IV
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
(…)
Article IX
Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.
The charges, filed at five prosecutor offices across Germany, cite Beck‘s statements on social media, in opinion pieces and media interviews in which he expressed support for Israel‘s military operation in Gaza, calling for making humanitarian aid conditional on Hamas freeing Israeli hostages.
Palestine Speaks and Jewish Voice for Just Peace in the Middle East filed the charges against Volker Beck, a former member of parliament and head of the German-Israeli Society.
„This is the first step in holding public figures who publicly make genocidal statements legally accountable,“ the groups posted on Instagram.
In its report on 10 February, Euro-Med Monitor stressed that 15 days after the ICJ ordered Israel to take all possible measures to prevent the crime of genocide against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli army has maintained its rate of killing civilians, depriving them of their most basic human rights, besieging them, and starving them.
The human rights group reported that the Israeli army has killed over 1,864 Palestinians—including 690 children and 441 women—and injured over 2,933 more since the ICJ ruling, bringing the death toll of Israel’s genocidal war against the Gaza Strip, ongoing since 7 October 2023, to 35,880, including 13,880 children and 7,910 women.
Israel’s military has continued to bomb and destroy houses even after its military operations in the southern Gaza Strip were supposedly terminated a few weeks ago, stated the rights group. The Israeli army has blown up at least 43 residential squares since the ICJ ruling, with each square containing between 20 to 50 houses, mainly in the Strip’s southern area of Khan Yunis.
9. In LaGrand, the Court exercised its Article 75(1) power in a situation of extreme urgency affecting one individual. Here there is a situation of extreme urgency affecting an estimated 1.4 million vulnerable Palestinians in Rafah, at least half of them children. They are at serious risk of irreparable harm to their right to be protected from acts of genocide contrary to Articles II and II of the Genocide
Convention, by a State which has already been found by this Court to be acting in plausible breach of its obligations under that Convention.
10. South Africa thus respectfully calls upon the Court to consider as a matter of the greatest urgency whether the developing circumstances in Rafah require that it exercise its power under Article 75(1) of the Rules of Court to prevent further imminent breach of the rights of Palestinians in Gaza. South Africa also reserves its own rights to take further action in respect of the situation.
11. I have the honour to assure the Court of my highest esteem and consideration.
South Africa said it asked the court to weigh whether Israel’s strikes on Rafah, and its intention to launch a ground offensive on the city where 1.4 million Palestinians have sought shelter, breaches both the U.N. Genocide Convention and preliminary orders handed down by the court last month in a case accusing Israel of genocide.
South Africa has made an urgent request to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to consider whether Israel‘s decision to extend its military operations in Rafah requires that the court use its power to prevent further breach of the rights of Palestinians in Gaza, South Africa‘s presidency said on Tuesday.
(09.02.2024)
The Special Adviser echoes the 26 January statement attributable to the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General taking note of the Order of the International Court of Justice of 26 January 2024 indicating provisional measures in the case concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel), in which the Court ordered Israel, inter alia, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, “to take all measures within its power” in relation to Palestinians in Gaza to prevent the commission of acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention, including killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s destruction and imposing measures intended to prevent births, as well as to “ensure with immediate effect that its military forces do not commit any of the above-described acts”. Furthermore, the Court indicated “that Israel must take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip”. In this connection, neither the Secretary-General nor the Special Adviser take a position in relation to ongoing judicial proceedings before the Court.Echoing the words of the Secretary-General, the Special Adviser reiterates that violations of international humanitarian law can never justify the collective punishment of the people in Gaza. “Civilians must be protected at all times on both sides,” Special Adviser Wairimu Nderitu reminded.
(09.02.2024)
The statement also referred to the provisional measures ordered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case brought forward by South Africa against Israel on prevention of genocide in the Gaza Strip.
Ms. Nderitu noted that neither the UN Secretary-General nor herself, as his Special Adviser, “take a position” in relation to ongoing judicial proceedings before the court.
In the 26 January decision, the ICJ ordered Israel, inter alia, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, “to take all measures within its power” to prevent the commission of acts within the scope of article II of the instrument, including killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s destruction and imposing measures intended to prevent births.
The court also ordered Israel to “ensure with immediate effect that its military forces do not commit any of the above-described acts”.
The executive authority in Nicaragua published an official statement in which it revealed that it warned the governments of said Western powers that they might be jointly complicit in the „flagrant and systemic violations“ of the Convention on Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and international humanitarian law in the Gaza Strip.
Nicaragua could move to take Germany, Canada, the U.K. and the Netherlands to the International Court of Justice over their role in aiding Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Nicaragua called on the four nations to immediately stop providing arms, munitions and technology to the Israeli army.
Is ICJ brave enough to speak the truth & act accordingly, or will it hide behind semantics again?
(Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.)
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with 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 whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.
Article IV
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
(…)
Article IX
Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.
Israel must take any measures to prevent and punish any incitement of genocidal statements against the Palestinian population.
Israel must take effective measures to provide relief to Palestinians.
It must stop the destruction of infrastructure.
The court states that Israel must submit a report one month from the judgement to show it has complied with the provisional measures. The provisional measures have binding effect.
Israel must share the report with RSA.
The court deems it necessary to emphasise that all parties are bound to international humanitarian law. The court mentions those abducted by Hamas – although mentions nothing about Palestinians political prisoners.
15-2 the judges ruled, that Israel must take all measures to stop acts that contravene Art 2 of the genocide convention.
Court notes 93% of the population of Gaza is facing critical levels of hunger.
Court notes unsanitary UNWRA refugee camps have become home to 1.4 million people.
Court also notes the specific devastation on children, and that this has been compounded, citing UNWRA, who claim that demonising language has been used by Israel.
Court cites the words of Israeli official who calls Palestinians animals….
South Africa has hauled Israel before the court, alleging it stands in breach of the UN’s Genocide Convention, signed in 1948 as the world’s response to the Holocaust.
Pretoria wants the ICJ to issue so-called “provisional measures”, emergency orders to protect Palestinians in Gaza from potential breaches of the convention.
All Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have issued many statements condemning Israel‘s assault on Gaza, but they did not take any further action. Saudi Arabia and the Arab League waited for more than a month of onslaught in Gaza to hold a summit in Riyadh to discuss the issue.
The summit decided to break the siege and blockade, but Arab countries never turned this resolution into action. Instead, Egypt obeyed Israeli commands and refused to give access to move injured civilians for treatment outside of Gaza unless Israel approved their names.
(heute)
Da die Industrie die gewünschte Munition nicht sofort liefern kann, werde die Option erwogen, dass die Bundeswehr zunächst Munition aus den Beständen abgibt, heißt es in dem Bericht. So könnte man der Bitte Israels zeitnah nachkommen.
Einige Details seien aber noch unklar. Israel wolle die Lieferungen der Munition bezahlen, derzeit laufen aber offenbar noch Gespräche über die Vertragsdetails und den Preis
France has opted not to endorse South Africa‘s genocide case against „Israel“ at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), AFP reported citing the recently inaugurated French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejourne: who claimed that accusing „Israel“ of genocide is „immoral“.
South Africa on Thursday presented its case against Israel of committing genocide in Gaza and asked the World Court to order Israel to stop its military operation. Watch the replay. Israel responds on Friday.
WATCH NOW:
Day 1 of SA v Israel on Genocide at World Court
Hotovely told Dale that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have found that „every school, every mosque, every second house, has an access to tunnel,“ referring to the tunnels used by Hamas—which were first built when Gaza was under Israeli control in 1980.
„That‘s an argument for destroying the whole of Gaza, every single building,“ Dale said, prompting Hotovely to ask, „Do you have another solution, how to destroy the underground tunnel city?“
Journalist Hamza Ali Shah said the ambassador‘s statement amounted to „a clear call for genocide.“
(Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.)
Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with 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 whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.
Article IV
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
(…)
Article IX
Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.
(Dec 11, 2023)
Legal experts and scholars have been warning since October that U.S. officials could be rendering themselves complicit in war crimes—and genocide—by continuing to arm the Israeli military as it wages indiscriminate war on the Gaza Strip.
Tlaib echoed that warning Monday, noting that the Biden administration has opted to „give weapons to a military that is very publicly and actively committing serious war crimes and crimes against humanity.“
(03.01.2024)
Turkish foreign ministry spokesperson Oncu Keceli said in a statement that Ankara welcomes the South African case, which says Israel has violated its obligations under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
“Israel‘s murder of more than 22,000 Palestinian civilians, the majority of whom were women and children, in Gaza for nearly three months should not go unpunished in any way,“ Keceli said.
(02.01.2024)
Malaysia’s foreign ministry said the petition also included a request for the ICJ to indicate provisional or short-term measures ordering Israel to stop its military campaign in the besieged territory, and to ensure Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention.
“The legal action against Israel before the ICJ is a timely and tangible step towards legal accountability for Israel’s atrocities in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territory at large,” the ministry said in a statement on Tuesday.
By the 1920s, Lemkin was formulating the concepts and laws that were articulated in his best-known book, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (1944). His unpublished manuscripts reveal that he saw colonialism as an integral part of a world history of genocide.
Those manuscripts covered an extremely wide range of cases where European colonial powers were responsible for mass killing, from the Spanish conquest of the Americas in the sixteenth century and the slaughter of indigenous peoples in Australia and New Zealand to the German massacre of the Hereros in Namibia a few decades earlier.
Article 7
1. There are established as principal organs of the United Nations: a General Assembly, a Security Council, an Economic and Social Council, a Trusteeship Council, an International Court of Justice and a Secretariat.
(…)
Article 94
1. Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party.
2. If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment.
(…)
Article 96
– The General Assembly or the Security Council may request the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on any legal question.
– Other organs of the United Nations and specialized agencies, which may at any time be so authorized by the General Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities.
Der IGH soll laut Statut Konflikte zwischen Staaten möglichst friedlich beilegen. Seine Urteile sind in der Regel bindend. Allerdings besitzen die UN-Richter keine Machtmittel, um einen Staat zur Umsetzung zu zwingen. Sie können aber den UN-Sicherheitsrat aufrufen, in der Sache tätig zu werden.
Allegations of war crimes by both Israel and by Palestinian militant groups in territories occupied by Israel in 1967 are already under investigation at the International Criminal Court, which is independent of the U.N. But the impact of that investigation is unclear because Israel is not a member nation of the I.C.C. and does not recognize its jurisdiction.
Israel is, however, a signatory of the Genocide Convention, along with South Africa, which paved the way for the case at the International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court.
South Africa and Israel are both parties to the Genocide Convention, according to the ICJ, which is also known as the World Court and is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.