Today, Thursday, the International Court of Justice will start hearing South Africa’s lawsuit against Israel. According to the lawsuit, Israel is guilty of mass destruction by its military actions in Gaza, which is often called genocide.
Mass destruction i.e. genocide is when the aim is to exterminate a national, ethnic, racial or religious group either completely or partially.
The action must therefore be intentional, i.e. bystander victims are not yet mass destruction.
According to the Gaza Ministry of Health, controlled by the terrorist organization Hamas, more than 23,000 Palestinians have died in Israel’s attack on Gaza since last fall, of which about two-thirds have been women and children.
– It is a question of whether it is possible to show that Israel’s purpose is to destroy the Palestinian ethnic group in whole or in part, says the emeritus professor of international law, academician of science Martti Koskenniemi. interviewed him by phone.
The background of the lawsuit is South Africa, which has traditionally held the treatment of Palestinians prominently displayed. South Africa also resents Israel’s alliance with South Africa’s former apartheid regime.
Koskenniemi has read the suit prepared by South Africa and considers it very skillfully formulated. He finds harsh quotes from the Israeli leadership in the material it presents.
– Some of the statements are quite terrible. It seems that those actors on the Israeli side at least intend to carry out ethnic cleansing, Koskenniemi estimates.
Koskenniemi points out that mass destruction as a crime does not necessarily require the intentional killing of a group of people, but also the treatment of a group of people for the purpose of mass destruction can be against an international agreement.
Israel has denied the accusations of mass destruction. Also the US Secretary of State, Israel’s main supporter Antony Blinken Has said genocide accusations as unfounded.
The definition of mass destruction is based on the Holocaust
During World War II, Nazi Germany systematically murdered millions of Jews. It was the genocide of the Jews, or the Holocaust, that was in the background when the international community decided to establish the state of Israel.
That is why it is ironic in Koskenniemi’s opinion that it is Israel that has been suspected of mass destruction.
– Israel and genocide are two historically related issues, says Koskenniemi.
That’s why Koskenniemi considers the case very significant.
– If it were to happen that the court found that Israel was guilty of genocide, it would be unheard of, says Koskenniemi.
However, he does not think it is clear that the lawsuit would be accepted as it is.
The International Court of Justice ICJ, located in The Hague, Holland, is a court under the UN that deals with charges against countries. The cases of individual people suspected of war crimes are heard by another court, the International War Crimes Court, the ICC.
Israel fears a temporary court order
Koskenniemi estimates that it may take a few years for the court to get a final decision on the matter.
More significant, however, is that the court can, at South Africa’s request, issue a temporary injunction to try to force Israel to stop hostilities in Gaza immediately.
Regarding the temporary order, the court can act very quickly. South Africa submitted its lawsuit to the court on December 29, the trial will begin on January 11, and according to Koskenniemi, the temporary order could come in just a few weeks.
The purpose of the temporary order would be to prevent mass destruction from happening in the future, even if there is still no solution as to whether Israel has possibly already committed mass destruction.
Does Finland want to take a stand?
The case brought against Israel will be decided by a 15-member international jury, which is not bound by the positions of the countries it represents. In addition, there are judges from South Africa and Israel.
In principle, the court is independent of the twists and turns of international politics and alliances, but UN member states can if they wish, profile themselves by supporting and commenting on lawsuits.
Koskenniemi is of the opinion that Finland should participate in the processing of the lawsuit and thereby emphasize the importance of the case. However, it is not that Finland should choose sides.
– In the side intervention, we could perhaps only present aspects that would be related to the application of the mass destruction agreement in one way or another, says Koskenniemi.
According to Koskenniemi, Finland could show with its activity that it considers mass extermination a very serious matter.
This is what Finland has already done with regard to the lawsuit brought by Ukraine. Ukraine has filed a lawsuit against Russia for mass destruction in the same court.