The court finds that there is sufficient basis for South Africa to have filed its complaint at the court, and rejects Israels request for the case to be thrown out.

The court has "taken note" of statements made by senior Israeli officials, including Yoav Gallant's saying that the IDF are "fighting human animals" and President Isaac Herzog's words that "an entire nation out there is responsible" and that there are no "uninvolved" civilians.

The International Court of Justice determines 'at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible, the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from Genocide'.

  • beef_curds [she/her]
    ·
    10 months ago

    I'm slightly surprised the court isn't also running cover for Israel. Is anyone here familiar enough with this to explain why not?

    I don't really believe in objective courts generally. Is there some difference here? Are they not subject to bullying from the same countries that mess with other international institutions?

    • plinky [he/him]
      ·
      10 months ago

      with tinfoil hat on:

      it gives off ramp for everybody to drop isntreal like hot potatoes

      Another possibility is judges have no fucks to give, cause they don't have cushy retirement gigs, they are already in one.