South Africa v. Israel before the International Court of Justice: Legal Proceedings and Initiatives to Strengthen International Humanitarian Law

The case instituted by the Republic of South Africa against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) constitutes one of the most significant international legal proceedings arising from the conflict in the Gaza Strip. It concerns allegations relating to the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) and has attracted considerable legal and political attention at both the regional and international levels.
South Africa instituted proceedings before the International Court of Justice on 29 December 2023, alleging that Israel had breached its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide with respect to the situation in the Gaza Strip. As part of the written proceedings, South Africa submitted its Memorial on 28 October 2024, setting out the legal arguments and factual basis in support of its claims.
The Court subsequently invited Israel to submit its response to the Memorial. Israel requested two separate extensions of the prescribed time limit, both of which were granted by the Court. Ultimately, Israel filed its Counter-Memorial with the Court on 12 March 2026.
Following the submission of the Counter-Memorial, South Africa announced that it would examine Israel's response before determining the next procedural step, whether by seeking the Court's authorization to submit additional written pleadings or by proceeding directly to the oral phase of the proceedings.
Although the judicial proceedings remain ongoing, many legal observers consider that the case may take several years before a final judgment is rendered, given the nature of litigation before the International Court of Justice and the possibility of further requests for extensions of time or other procedural measures. Likewise, publicly circulated estimates regarding the timing of an interim or final decision remain speculative and non-binding and should not be regarded as definitive deadlines, as they are ultimately subject to the Court's procedural decisions and the progress of the case.
In a parallel development, 2024 witnessed the launch of the Global Initiative to Galvanize Political Commitment to International Humanitarian Law. The initiative is jointly led by South Africa, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, France, Brazil, Kazakhstan, and China, in cooperation with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). It seeks to strengthen respect for international humanitarian law, reinforce the principles of human dignity, promote compliance with the Geneva Conventions, and contribute to preventing serious violations of human rights during armed conflicts.
A considerable number of States have joined the initiative, and the first international conference dedicated to it is expected to be hosted in Amman, Jordan, during the current year. This reflects the growing international commitment to strengthening respect for the rules of international humanitarian law amid the increasing number of crises and armed conflicts around the world.
It is important to emphasize that this international initiative is entirely independent of the proceedings pending before the International Court of Justice and bears no legal or procedural connection to the case itself, notwithstanding the participation of certain States in both processes.
With regard to the judicial proceedings, a number of States have announced their participation in support of South Africa's legal position, including Belgium, Brazil, Bolivia, Comoros, Chile, Ireland, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Iceland, Libya, Mexico, the Maldives, Namibia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Palestine, Spain, and Türkiye, in accordance with the procedures provided for under the Statute of the International Court of Justice.
The case, with its legal, humanitarian, and diplomatic dimensions, continues to be closely monitored by the international community, not only because of its implications for the interpretation and application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, but also because of its potential impact on the development of international jurisprudence and the future of legal accountability for serious violations of international humanitarian law. Furthermore, many observers believe that major States, such as Spain, have an important role to play in influencing the course of the proceedings and exerting diplomatic pressure on all parties with the aim of bringing an end to what they describe as an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe.
As the proceedings before the Court continue, the issuance of a final judgment remains contingent upon the completion of all judicial stages. Meanwhile, international efforts continue, through both judicial mechanisms and humanitarian and diplomatic initiatives, to promote respect for international humanitarian law and ensure the protection of civilians during armed conflicts.