Israel v S Africa is ‘the strongest case of genocide ever brought before the ICJ’

The case filed by South Africa against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is “arguably the strongest case of genocide ever brought before the Court,” says Professor William Schabas, one of the world’s leading authorities on international criminal law. “There is already sufficient evidence in the public domain to sustain the charge of genocide,” he added, citing Israeli military actions in Gaza and public statements by senior Israeli officials as indicative of genocidal intent. “This is a litmus test for the credibility of international justice.”

In an exclusive interview with the European Centre for Populism Studies (ECPS), Schabas warned that the Court’s handling of the case will define whether international law can still restrain powerful states, or whether impunity will prevail. “We have more than circumstantial evidence,” he explained. “There are patterns of conduct, systematic destruction, starvation as a method of war, and a growing body of dehumanising rhetoric from Israeli leaders.”

He pointed to Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant’s call to cut off food, water and electricity to Gaza, and described the conduct of Israeli forces as aimed at the elimination of Palestinians from the territory. “That leads to genocide,” he said.

The South Africa v. Israel case accuses the Israeli government of violating the Genocide Convention through its military campaign in Gaza, which has killed more than 63,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children. Schabas drew attention to dehumanising language from Israeli officials and the military’s stated aim of ethnically cleansing Gaza. He compared such language to other genocidal contexts, including Rwanda and colonial-era Namibia.

Schabas dismissed Israel’s self-defence argument as “bogus,” because the ICJ has declared the occupation of Gaza to be unlawful. “You cannot claim self-defence while engaging in unlawful actions,” said Schabas. “It’s like a bank robber who fires on the police because they’re firing on him—he can’t go to court and invoke self-defence, because he is, by definition, acting unlawfully”.

“In the same way, I don’t think Israel can credibly rely on self-defence here. In my view, this is simply a bogus argument”.

Crucially, Schabas warned that third-party states risk becoming “accomplices to genocide.” He cited the US, Germany, and others supplying arms, political cover and intelligence to Israel, despite overwhelming evidence of mass atrocities. “Article III of the Genocide Convention makes complicity a crime,” he stressed.

Schabas warned that if Israel is not held accountable, the damage to international law will be irreversible. “This is a test for the courts,” he said, recalling how the ICJ lost credibility for two decades after ruling against African states in the Namibia case in the 1960s. “The same fate could await today’s courts if they fail to act.”

He also denounced the double standards in Western responses to genocide allegations. While many Western states support cases against Russia or Myanmar, they have rejected the genocide case against Israel outright. “Germany, for example, argued for a broad interpretation of genocide in the Myanmar case, then flipped to a narrow view in the Israel case. That kind of hypocrisy won’t survive legal scrutiny.”