Connect with us

World

How will South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel work?

Published

on

How will South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel work?

Two days of public hearings in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel will start at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Thursday, as pro-Palestine campaigners hope the World Court might halt Israel’s devastating military campaign in Gaza.

The case, filed by South Africa, sets a precedent as the first at the ICJ relating to the siege on the Gaza Strip, where more than 23,000 people have been killed since October 7, nearly 10,000 of them children.

In its application submitted on December 29, Pretoria accuses Israel of committing genocide in contravention of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, which both South Africa and Israel are party to. Countries party to the treaty have the collective right to prevent and stop the crime.

The killing of civilians in large numbers, especially children; the expulsion and displacement of Palestinians en masse and the destruction of their homes; the inciting statements by several Israel officials portraying Palestinians as sub-humans to be collectively punished, all constitute genocide and show proof of intent, South Africa alleges.

Advertisement

The suit also lists the blockade on food and the destruction of essential health services for pregnant women and babies as measures by Tel Aviv “intended to bring about their [Palestinians] destruction as a group”.

More than 85 percent of Gaza’s 2.3 million people have been displaced since October 7, with aid agencies warning of famine risk amid mounting hunger. The 365sq km (141sq miles) enclave has already been under an Israeli blockade since 2007.

Israel denies these allegations and has promised to defend itself. A separate case is continuing at the International Criminal Court, a different body. Where the ICC tries individuals in criminal cases, the ICJ focuses on legal disputes between states.

Here’s what to expect from the ICJ:

What are the key dates in the case?

The first part of the case against Israel will begin on January 11, 2024, focusing on a special emergency request by South Africa asking the ICJ to urgently order the Israeli military out of Gaza and for Israel to stop the indiscriminate bombing of civilians.

Advertisement

That is not unusual. Under ICJ rules, countries can request that interim measures be put in place before the case proper starts if one party believes that the violations that formed the basis of its application are still continuing, as is the case in Gaza.

INTERACTIVE - Judges at the International court of Justice ICJ South Africa Israel Gaza-1704884844

If approved, the ICJ could issue an order in weeks. In the case of Ukraine v Russia, the ICJ responded to Kyiv’s requests for an emergency order against Moscow’s invasion in less than three weeks. The court, on March 16, 2022, ordered Russia to “immediately suspend the military operations”.

But it could be tricky for the court in this case, says Professor Michael Becker of Trinity College of Dublin, referring to the peculiarities of the South African case.

“The Ukraine case is different because the two parties were also the two involved in the conflict. Hamas is not a party in the suit and the ICJ might be reluctant to say Israel should cease its actions, when it can’t ask Hamas to do the same,” he said, adding that the court might ask Tel Aviv to instead show a lot more restraint.

A full judgement from the court, determining whether Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, will likely take years to emerge. A 2019 case that The Gambia brought against Myanmar for its military crackdown on Rohingya refugees is still in trial, for example, more than four years after it began.

Advertisement
a multi-storey building with windows blown out surrounded by rubble
An aerial view of a destroyed UNRWA school following Israeli attacks hit the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza on December 12, 2023. Israel has targeted schools, hospitals and residential areas during its 96-day military campaign [Mahmoud Sabbah/Anadolu via Getty Images]

How does the ICJ decide cases?

The ICJ is composed of 15 judges appointed for nine-year terms through separate, simultaneous elections at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) and the UN Security Council.

Any country can propose candidates but no two judges must come from one country. At the moment, the bench includes judges from all parts of the world including France, Slovakia, Somalia and India.

To appoint a president and vice president, the judges hold a secret ballot. President Joan E Donoghue of the United States leads the ICJ presently alongside Vice President Kirill Gevorgian of Russia. Both of their terms expire in February.

ICJ judges ought to be impartial and not act as extensions of their countries. In the past though, judges have voted in line with their countries’ politics. In 2022, when the bench voted in favour of the decision to order Russia out of Ukraine, judges from Russia and China were the only two who voted against the decision.

Still, that’s the exception, said Becker, also a former ICJ staffer. “I would reject the idea that states have influence on decisions. ICJ judges are independent actors,” he said.

Israel and South Africa can appoint one “ad hoc” judge each to join the bench since neither is represented. Aharon Barak, a former Supreme Court chief justice and Holocaust survivor, is Israel’s choice. Barak was accused of “legitimising” Israeli occupation of Palestine during his stint at the top court. South Africa has appointed Dikgang Moseneke, a former deputy chief justice.

Advertisement

At the preliminaries this week, the ICJ will determine if it has jurisdiction in the case at all. Typically, jurisdiction is established when the states involved affirm that they recognise the court’s power, or if the countries are party to a treaty. South Africa and Israel are parties to the Genocide Convention, drawn up in 1948 after the Holocaust, and thus, subject to the ICJ’s interpretations of it.

It should be straightforward, but it is too early to say if Israel will dispute the ICJ’s jurisdiction in this case, just like Russia has done in its case with Ukraine – despite Moscow being a party to the Genocide Convention. Losing parties tend to pull that argument as a last resort, Becker said.

How will South Africa and Israel be represented in court?

Countries appoint teams of “Special Agents” which usually include top legal counsel or reputed law professors. Israel has selected British lawyer Malcolm Shaw to be on its team. John Dugard, an international law professor, will lead South Africa’s team.

At the hearing for an emergency order from January 11, the two teams will present their arguments to the full bench. All 17 judges will sit at the head of the Great Hall of Justice in the ICJ to hear the arguments on both sides. Any questions posed to the agents don’t have to be answered on the spot, as in a regular court trial, and can be submitted in writing at a later date. There won’t be witnesses, as in a regular case, either.

Advertisement

While the provisional hearing will be over in a matter of weeks, the main case, which will determine whether Israel is indeed guilty of committing genocide as South Africa claims, will take time. The Hague-based court will give both parties time to build and submit more detailed arguments. Multiple hearings will follow. After that, the judges will take a vote, and then a final decision will be announced.INTERACTIVE - Signatories to genocide convention-1704876407

What could a final judgement look like?

It is hard to predict how the judges will vote or what form a sentence could take. But if the majority finds Israel to be in violation of international law at the end of the months of deliberations, Tel Aviv would be obliged to do as the ICJ decides.

ICJ judgements are legally binding and cannot be appealed. One issue though: The court has no real enforcement power.

That could be a problem for South Africa. “There’s a real risk that an adverse judgement does not generate compliance,” Becker noted.

If Israel does not comply, South Africa can approach the UN Security Council for enforcement. But there, the US, Israel’s number one backer, has veto power as a permanent member. Washington could shield Israel from punishment, as it has done multiple times in this war. Since 1945, the US has vetoed 34 out of 36 UNSC draft resolutions related to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

“This is one of the reasons why it’s important to think less about the judgement issued by the ICJ and more about the process itself,” said Mai El-Sadany, the director of Washington-based Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy.

Advertisement

The case in itself, she said, could be more useful in putting more international pressure on Israel to stop the war.

“[It] can have significant impacts for accountability in a different form, whether documenting the experiences of victims, naming and shaming perpetrators, or setting an international precedent,” she told Al Jazeera.

INTERACTIVE - ICJ vs ICC-1704875400

Will other countries intervene?

Other countries can legally intervene in favour of Israel or South Africa, although none have done so yet. In Ukraine v Russia, a record 32 countries, including all of the European Union (except Hungary), intervened to support Ukraine.

While seen as a political show of solidarity, interventions might actually complicate things, said Becker of Trinity College.

“If a state intervenes because they want to show solidarity, it doesn’t add anything from a legal perspective,” he said. “What will happen is that they can slow the process down and cause logistical challenges for the ICJ. Anyone who wants to support should have joined South Africa in its initial application.”

Advertisement

Cases filed by multiple countries would have slowed down the case as the court would have to attend to them all. If a country had joined South Africa in filing, it would still be one process, not separate suits.

Instead, experts say, countries or organisations can put out political statements in support of either party. Already, Malaysia, Turkey, Bolivia and several others have said they support Pretoria for filing the case.

The US, too, has defended Israel in several statements.

An injured Palestinian boy is carried from the ground following an Israeli airstrike outside the entrance of the al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City.
Nearly 10,000 children are among the more than 23,000 people killed in Israeli bombardment [Abed Khaled/AP Photo]

World

‘Peaky Blinders’ Movie Trailer: Cillian Murphy’s Tommy Shelby Goes to War Against His Son, Played by Barry Keoghan

Published

on

‘Peaky Blinders’ Movie Trailer: Cillian Murphy’s Tommy Shelby Goes to War Against His Son, Played by Barry Keoghan

Netflix has released the official trailer for “Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man,” with the original TV series star Cillian Murphy returning as Tommy Shelby. As revealed by the new trailer, Barry Keoghan plays a grown-up Duke Shelby, the illegitimate son of Tommy who’s now running the Peaky Blinders gang.

The trailer shows that the Peaky Blinders are terrorizing England, which is in upheaval during World War II.

“Your gypsy son is running Peaky Blinders like it’s 1919 all over again,” Ada Shelby (Sophie Rundle) tells Tommy, who is forced to return to his violent, old lifestyle and step up against Duke. Tim Roth plays a British Fascist sympathizer, who offers Duke a way to support Germany during the war. Eventually Tommy must remind everyone who he is and take a stand against Duke to save his city.

In addition to Murphy and Rundle, Stephen Graham and Ned Dennehy return as Shelby family allies Hayden Stagg and Charlie Strong, respectively. The cast also includes newcomers Rebecca Ferguson and Jay Lycurgo.

Advertisement

Tom Harper, who directed several episodes of the original “Peaky Blinders” series, helms the film. The show premiered on BBC in 2013, with Netflix later acquiring the U.S. rights. “Peaky Blinders” ended in 2022 after six seasons. The show was created by British screenwriter Steven Knight. A sequel series was picked up for two seasons by Netflix and BBC, with Murphy executive producing. According to the plot description, it takes place after “The Immortal Man.”

“After being heavily bombed in WWII, Birmingham is building a better future out of concrete and steel,” the logline says. “In a new era of Steven Knight’s ‘Peaky Blinders,’ the race to own Birmingham’s massive reconstruction project becomes a brutal contest of mythical dimensions. This is a city of unprecedented opportunity and danger: with the Shelby family right at its blood-soaked heart.”

“Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man” releases on Netflix on March 20.

Watch the trailer below.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

US thwarted near-catastrophic prison break of 6,000 ISIS fighters in Syria

Published

on

US thwarted near-catastrophic prison break of 6,000 ISIS fighters in Syria

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: This was the kind of prison break officials say could have changed the region, and perhaps even the world, overnight.

Nearly 6,000 ISIS detainees, described by a senior U.S. intelligence official as “the worst of the worst,” were being held in northern Syria as clashes and instability threatened the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, the guards responsible for keeping the militants locked away and preventing a feared ISIS resurgence. U.S. officials believed that if the prisons collapsed in the chaos, the consequences would have been immediate.

“If these 6,000 or so got out and returned to the battlefield, that would basically be the instant reconstitution of ISIS,” the senior intelligence official told Fox News Digital.

In an exclusive interview, the official walked Fox News Digital step by step through the behind-the-scenes operation that moved thousands of ISIS detainees out of Syria and into Iraqi custody, describing a multi-agency scramble that unfolded over weeks, with intelligence warnings, rapid diplomacy and a swift military lift.

Advertisement

US MILITARY LAUNCHES AIRSTRIKES AGAINST ISIS TARGETS IN SYRIA, OFFICIALS SAY

ISIS wives and children remain in “fragile” Syrian detention camps under Damascus control while male fighters transfer to Iraq, leaving detention crisis unresolved. (Santiago Montag/Anadolu via Getty Image)

The risk, the official explained, had been building for months. In late October, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard began to assess that Syria’s transition could tip into disorder and create the conditions for a catastrophic jailbreak.

The ODNI sent representatives to Syria and Iraq at that time to begin early discussions with both the SDF and the Iraqi government about how to remove what the official repeatedly described as the most dangerous detainees before events overtook them.

Those fears sharpened in early January as fighting erupted in Aleppo and began spreading eastward. Time was running out to prevent catastrophe. “We saw this severe crisis situation,” the official said.

Advertisement

U.S. ANNOUNCES MORE MILITARY ACTIONS AGAINST ISIS: ‘WE WILL NOT RELENT’

A fighter of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) holds an ISIL flag and a weapon on a street in the city of Mosul, June 23, 2014. (Reuters Photo)

According to the source, the ODNI oversaw daily coordination calls across agencies as the situation escalated. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was “managing the day to day” on policy considerations, while the ODNI drove a working group that kept CENTCOM, diplomats and intelligence officials aligned on the urgent question: how to keep nearly 6,000 ISIS fighters from slipping into the fog of war.

The Iraqi government, the official said, understood the stakes. Baghdad had its own reasons to move quickly, fearing that if thousands of detainees escaped, they would spill across the border and revive a threat Iraq still remembers in visceral terms.

The official described Iraq’s motivation bluntly: leaders recognized that a massive breakout could force Iraq back into a “2014 ISIS is on our border situation once more.”

Advertisement

The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, the official said, played a pivotal role in smoothing the diplomatic runway for what would become a major logistical undertaking.

Then came the physical lift. The official credited CENTCOM’s surge of resources to make the plan real on the ground, saying that “moving in helicopters” and other assets enabled detainees to be removed in a compressed timeframe.

“Thanks to the efforts… moving in helicopters, moving in more resources, and then just logistically making this happen, we were able to get these nearly 6,000 out in the course of just a few weeks,” the official said.

ISIS FIGHTERS STILL AT LARGE AFTER SYRIAN PRISON BREAK, CONTRIBUTING TO VOLATILE SECURITY SITUATION

A view of Hol Camp, where families linked to the Islamic State group are being held, in Hasakah province, Syria, Jan. 21, 2026. (Izz Aldien Alqasem/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Advertisement

The SDF, had been securing the prisons, but its attention was strained by fighting elsewhere, fueling U.S. fears that a single breach could spiral into a mass escape. Ultimately, detainees were transported into Iraq, where they are now held at a facility near Baghdad International Airport under Iraqi authority.

The next phase, the official said, is focused on identification and accountability. FBI teams are in Iraq enrolling detainees biometrically, while U.S. and Iraqi officials examine what intelligence can be declassified and used in prosecutions.

“What they were asking us for, basically, is giving them as much intelligence and information that we have on these individuals,” the official said. “So right now, the priority is on biometrically identifying these individuals.”

The State Department is also pushing countries of origin to take responsibility for their citizens held among the detainees.

State Department is doing outreach right now and encouraging all these different countries to come and pick up their fighters, Fox News has learned.

Advertisement

While the transfer focused strictly on ISIS fighters, the senior intelligence official said families held in camps such as al-Hol were not part of the operation, leaving a major unresolved security and humanitarian challenge.

ISIS EXPLOITING SYRIA’S CHAOS AS US STRIKES EXPOSE GROWING THREAT

Syrian Democratic Forces fighters pose for a photo with the American flag after a victory ceremony announcing the defeat of ISIL on March 23, 2019, in Baghouz, Syria. (Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

The camps themselves were under separate arrangements, the official said, and responsibility shifted as control on the ground evolved. 

According to the official, the Syrian Democratic Forces and the Syrian government reached an understanding that Damascus would take over the al-Hol camp, which holds thousands of ISIS-affiliated women and children.

Advertisement

“As you can see from social media, the al-Hol camp is pretty much being emptied out,” the official said, adding that it “appears the Syrian government has decided to let them go free,” a scenario the official described as deeply troubling for regional security. “That is very concerning.”

The fate of the families has long been viewed by counterterrorism officials as one of the most complicated, unresolved elements of the ISIS detention system. Many of the children have grown up in camps after ISIS lost territorial control, and some are now approaching fighting age, raising fears about future radicalization and recruitment.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Iraqi security forces pose with ISIS flag, which they pulled from University of Anbar on July 26, 2015. Forces clashed with ISIS militants inside the compound. (Reuters)

For now, the official said, intelligence agencies are closely tracking developments after a rapid operation that, in their view, prevented thousands of experienced ISIS militants from reentering the battlefield at once and potentially reigniting the group’s fighting force. 

Advertisement

“This is a rare good news story coming out of Syria,” the official concluded.

Continue Reading

World

Israel installed security at Epstein’s Manhattan apartment for ex-PM Barak

Published

on

Israel installed security at Epstein’s Manhattan apartment for ex-PM Barak

Investigative report reveals the Israeli UN mission coordinated with the convicted sex offender’s staff to secure a Manhattan residence.

The Israeli government installed security equipment and controlled access to a Manhattan apartment building managed by the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, according to an investigation published by Drop Site News.

Based on a tranche of emails recently released by the United States Department of Justice, the report detailed how Israeli officials coordinated directly with Epstein’s staff starting in early 2016 to secure a residence at 301 East 66th Street. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak frequently used the apartment for extended stays.

Advertisement

While the property was technically owned by a company linked to Epstein’s brother, Mark Epstein, the disgraced financier essentially controlled it. The units in the building were frequently loaned to Epstein’s associates and used to house underage models, the report said.

Barak served as prime minister from 1999 to 2001. Under Israeli law, former prime ministers receive state-funded security after leaving office. The documents expose a direct operational relationship between Israel’s permanent mission to the United Nations and Epstein’s enterprise.

Rafi Shlomo, the former director of protective services at the Israeli mission and head of Barak’s security detail, personally controlled access to the apartment. Shlomo conducted background checks on Epstein’s employees and cleaning staff and held meetings with them to coordinate the installation of surveillance equipment.

Coordinated surveillance

The structural modifications carried out by the Israeli government required permission from Epstein.

In a January 2016 email exchange, Barak’s wife, Nili Priell, discussed the installation of alarms and surveillance tools with Epstein’s longtime assistant Lesley Groff. Priell noted the system included sensors on the windows and remote access capabilities.

Advertisement

“They can neutralize the system from far, before you need somebody to enter the appartment [sic],” Priell wrote. “The only thing to do is call Rafi from the consulate and let him know who and when is entering.”

Groff later confirmed to Barak and Priell that Epstein had personally authorised the physical alterations to the property, writing: “Jeffrey says he does not mind holes in the walls and this is all just fine!”

The correspondence between the Israeli mission and Epstein’s representatives continued regularly throughout 2016 and 2017 to manage access for maids and coordinate subsequent visits by Barak.

State ties and political fallout

After Epstein’s death in a New York jail in 2019 while he was awaiting a sex-trafficking trial, Barak tried to downplay his relationship with the financier, claiming that while they had met, Epstein never supported or paid him.

The political fallout from the relationship has been seized upon by Barak’s rivals in Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently weaponised the newly released documents, arguing that the ties implicated Barak rather than Israel.

Advertisement

“Jeffrey Epstein’s unusual close relationship with Ehud Barak doesn’t suggest Epstein worked for Israel. It proves the opposite,” Netanyahu stated, accusing Barak of working with the “anti-Zionist radical left” to undermine Israel’s current government.

However, the emails released by the US Justice Department demonstrate that the entanglement extended beyond Barak to other active Israeli state officials.

Yoni Koren, a longtime aide to Barak who died in 2023, was also a frequent guest at the 66th Street apartment. Congressional investigations and leaked emails indicated Koren stayed at the Epstein-controlled residence multiple times, including in 2013 while he was serving as the bureau chief for the Israeli Ministry of Defence. Further records showed Koren continued to use the apartment while receiving medical treatment in New York until Epstein’s final arrest in 2019.

Intelligence and settler funding

The ties between Epstein and Israel have come into sharp focus since the release of millions of documents relating to the criminal investigations into Epstein. Beyond his interactions with members of the global elite, including Barak, the files document Epstein’s financial support for Israeli groups, including Friends of the Israeli army and the settler organisation the Jewish National Fund as well as his connections to the Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence agency.

Barak has expressed remorse over his ties to Epstein. Despite the financier pleading guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution in 2008, which resulted in a prison sentence, Barak maintained a close personal and business relationship with him. The former Israeli leader claimed he remained unaware of the full scope of Epstein’s crimes until a wider federal inquiry was opened in 2019.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending