0:02 Israel is being accused of committing
0:04 genocide in the un's top court and now
0:06 that we have a preliminary ruling from
0:09 the court it's raised a lot of questions
0:11 I've talked to some experts to try to
0:14 help answer 10 of the biggest ones so
0:16 let's start with the basics what is this
0:19 case about this case is being tried in
0:21 the international court of justice which
0:23 is the un's main judicial body it's
0:25 often referred to as the world Court it
0:27 is the the Pinnacle Court in the
0:29 international legal system it's
0:31 basically where countries can take each
0:33 other to court this particular case is
0:35 between Israel and South Africa and will
0:38 be decided by 17 judges from around the
0:41 world South Africa says Israel's
0:44 military operation in Gaza breaches the
0:47 1948 genocide convention and has a
0:50 genocidal intent against Palestinians in
0:52 its argument it refers to things like
0:55 the high number of Palestinians killed
0:57 the displacement of the vast majority of
1:00 the population the Restriction of aid
1:02 the attacks on healthcare workers in
1:04 hospitals and public statements made by
1:07 Israeli officials inciting genocide
1:10 Israel meanwhile argues that it has the
1:13 right to defend itself and says although
1:16 the civilian suffering in Gaza is tragic
1:18 its military operation is following
1:20 International humanitarian law and that
1:22 its true intent shouldn't be taken from
1:24 what it says are random quotes but from
1:26 official government policy and
1:29 statements made by its leaders which it
1:31 says demonstr at the opposite of
1:33 genocidal intent for example the Prime
1:35 Minister repeating that Israel is
1:37 targeting Hamas and not the civilian
1:40 population question number two why is
1:42 South Africa involved because of the
1:44 seriousness of genocide any state that
1:47 recognizes the genocide convention can
1:49 bring charges to the icj even if they're
1:52 not directly involved and South Africa
1:54 has a long history of supporting the
1:57 Palestinian people however experts say
1:59 the likely reason why South Africa
2:02 decided to take the lead in this case
2:04 was to avoid any legal complications
2:06 that may have slowed things down
2:09 Palestine has brought a case to the icj
2:11 before and recognizes the genocide
2:14 convention but it's not a fully fledged
2:17 member of the UN and is not recognized
2:20 by Israel as a state which many experts
2:22 speculate would have resulted in Israel
2:24 refusing to participate in the case
2:26 Israel simply wouldn't have shown up had
2:29 Palestine brought the case now why has a
2:31 rule in already been made cases like
2:34 this can take years to reach a final
2:37 ruling so in the meantime South Africa
2:39 requested what are known as provisional
2:41 measures these are basically emergency
2:43 orders that the court can hand out to
2:46 stop a situation from getting worse
2:48 while a case unfolds South Africa's main
2:51 request was asking the court to order
2:53 Israel to stop its military operations
2:55 in Gaza in other words to order an
2:57 immediate ceasefire and it just says
2:59 look there's a risk here that if we
3:01 don't step in and make these emergency
3:04 measures things will get so much worse
3:05 that our eventual judgment won't have
3:08 any effect at all Israel on the other
3:10 hand requested that the court dismiss
3:12 the case altogether the ruling that
3:14 we've just received has to do with these
3:17 specific requests and is only an interim
3:20 ruling it's not a ruling on whether or
3:22 not Israel is committing genocide like I
3:25 said a final ruling on that is still a
3:27 long way away just as a quick side note
3:29 the reason why this case is solely
3:32 focused on accusations of genocide and
3:34 not accusations of war crimes for
3:36 example is because war crimes are
3:39 outside of the jurisdiction of the icj
3:42 war crimes are defined by the UN as
3:44 violations of international humanitarian
3:47 law that incur individual criminal
3:51 responsibility the icj is not a criminal
3:53 court and it's set up for disputes
3:56 between states not individuals charging
3:58 an individual with a war crime is
4:00 something that's usually hand handled by
4:02 the international criminal court which
4:04 is a completely different organization
4:06 that follows a completely different
4:09 legal process so what was the interim
4:12 ruling the icj denied Israel's request
4:14 to dismiss the case accept South
4:16 Africa's arguments that there's a
4:18 plausible case that genocide has
4:21 occurred and may be occurring right now
4:23 it also granted most of South Africa's
4:25 requests except for its main one
4:28 ordering an immediate ceasefire instead
4:30 the court has ordered Israel to do
4:31 everything it can to prevent acts of
4:33 genocide as well as stopping comments
4:36 that may incite genocide Israel has also
4:38 been ordered to make sure that civilians
4:41 in Gaza are provided with basic services
4:44 and the humanitarian Aid they urgently
4:46 need plus Israel must report back to the
4:48 court within a month to demonstrate that
4:51 it's been following these court orders
4:54 the icj judges voted overwhelmingly in
4:57 favor of most of South Africa's requests
4:59 so why didn't the court also order a
5:01 ceasefire one of the main theories posed
5:04 by a number of legal experts is that
5:06 even if the court wanted to it just
5:08 doesn't necessarily have jurisdiction to
5:10 order a full ceasefire not just because
5:12 of how narrow the focus of South
5:14 Africa's case is but because the court
5:16 doesn't actually have jurisdiction over
5:19 Hamas because Hamas isn't a state so the
5:22 court can't actually order a ceasefire
5:24 because it can only order one side to
5:26 stop fighting which would have raised
5:28 issues about what impact that would have
5:32 had upon Israel's inherent right to
5:34 self-defense for example in its ruling
5:37 the icj called for Hamas to release its
5:39 hostages but it can't actually order it
5:41 to and this brings us to the next
5:44 question why isn't Hamas also before the
5:46 court like I said the icj is only for
5:49 disputes between states and Hamas isn't
5:51 a state charging an individual with
5:53 genocide or a war crime is something
5:56 that's handled by the IC this is also
5:58 why it's the state of Israel before the
6:01 icj and not specific leaders in Israel
6:03 so what is the punishment for genocide
6:07 at the icj the short answer to this is
6:09 not much because the icj isn't a
6:12 criminal court like the ICC usually the
6:14 Court's orders are declaratory so that
6:17 means that they state the law and don't
6:19 go any further than that for example in
6:22 the '90s Serbia was ruled to have failed
6:24 to prevent genocide occurring in the
6:26 town of sanit which is the only time a
6:28 breach of the genocide convention has
6:31 been found at the icj the result of that
6:34 ruling was basically stating what the
6:36 breach was ordering Serbia to follow the
6:39 convention in future and to cooperate
6:41 with cases involving individuals accused
6:43 of genocide the court can also order a
6:45 country to pay reparations but an
6:48 important wrinkle to all of this is that
6:51 even though icj rulings are binding and
6:53 can't be appealed the court doesn't
6:55 actually have any power to enforce
6:57 anything and relies on countries acting
7:01 in good faith for example in 2022 the
7:03 court ordered Russia to stop its
7:05 military operation in Ukraine which
7:08 Russia basically ignored if an order is
7:10 ignored the UN Security Council can be
7:13 asked to intervene but even the security
7:16 council's powers are limited because any
7:18 of its permanent members like Russia or
7:22 the United States can veto any decision
7:24 and even when the council has agreed to
7:27 support an icj ruling as it did in 1993
7:30 for example its resolution failed to
7:33 prevent the CIT a massacre just 2 years
7:35 later the fact that the icj mostly just
7:38 States what the law is and can't
7:40 actually enforce anything often leads
7:42 people to asking what's the point of the
7:45 icj experts say for the most part
7:47 countries do respect the decisions of
7:49 the court and defying its orders can
7:53 lead to reputational damage sanctions
7:55 and international isolation rulings also
7:57 helped to shape and influence
7:59 International opinion and Future
8:01 decision making it creates this
8:03 historical record you have a set of
8:05 facts which are essentially indisputable
8:07 because a third party neutral decision
8:09 maker has looked at the evidence from
8:12 both sides plus emergency orders from
8:14 the court can help to deescalate
8:16 worsening situations which is what
8:18 experts hope will happen in Gaza after
8:21 this ruling the court was very clear to
8:24 emphasize the need for ensuring that
8:25 this doesn't get any worse they called
8:27 it a catastrophe and this brings us to
8:30 the final question what does all of this
8:32 mean for the people of Gaza in the week
8:34 following the ruling according to gaza's
8:36 Ministry of Health more than a th000
8:38 Palestinians were killed and more
8:41 recently a top un official has accused
8:44 Israel of already breaching the icj's
8:47 orders South Africa has even made
8:49 another urgent request to the court in
8:51 what experts say is an attempt to Halt
8:54 Israel's ground invasion of Rafa a city
8:56 in the south of Gaza where more than a
8:58 million Palestinians have fled since the
8:59 start of the war
9:01 Israel maintains that it's following
9:04 International humanitarian law as it
9:06 says it has been this entire time
9:08 mediating countries are still hopeful
9:11 that a ceasefire deal can be reached but
9:14 Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu says
9:16 Israel's military operation in Gaza
9:19 won't end until it eliminates Hamas many
9:22 experts say the most concrete order by
9:24 the court that may lead to some change
9:27 is the one relating to humanitarian Aid
9:30 however in recent days un officials have
9:31 reported their healthare situation in
9:35 Gaza is still extremely precarious and
9:37 that the risk of famine is increasing
9:40 day by day beyond that experts say at
9:43 the very least Israel will be aware that
9:45 its actions in Gaza are now under an
9:48 even greater microscope also that this
9:51 ruling may make Israel's allies reassess
9:53 how they're supporting this military
9:56 operation there's also the possibility
9:58 of states which are supplying Israel
10:01 with military aid for example they're at
10:03 risk now of um being found to have aided
10:06 or abetted an internationally wrongful
10:08 act the bottom line here is that we'll
10:09 have a better understanding of just how
10:11 much of an impact this ruling has
10:13 actually made by the time Israel has
10:16 been ordered to report back to the icj
