SA uses diplomacy to garner support for its ICJ genocide case against Israel, says Pandor

South Africa will respond to the report Israel has submitted on provisional measures it has taken in the Israel-Gaza war, as ordered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) a month ago.

“South Africa will continue to pursue the opportunities available to us... to ensure full and effective implementation of the existing provisional (ICJ) measures,” said International Relations Minister Naledi Pandor, answering questions in the House on Wednesday.

“We continue to act to seek action that is responsive to the court’s order as the government of South Africa.”

This comes as questions are raised over Israel’s compliance with the ICJ measures. 

The executives of seven international human rights organisations, including Amnesty International, ActionAid and Oxfam, raised concerns in a joint statement, saying the provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance to Gaza had not happened.

“... (T)he situation on the ground has deteriorated further. Israel’s airstrikes in Rafah killed at least 100 Palestinians in a single day, defying both international calls for moderation and potentially the ICJ order. 

“Over 1.5 million people trapped in Rafah have nowhere safe to go, and many have already been displaced multiple times. All of the Israeli supposed-safe spaces have been compromised, without exception; further proof that there was never truly anywhere safe in Gaza,” read the 18 February statement.

Read more in Daily Maverick: Middle East Crisis news hub

In the House on Tuesday, Pandor said South Africa was “exploring partnerships with like-minded countries to call for an end to Israeli genocidal actions”. 

Where resistance was encountered, South Africa used the “diplomacy of the legitimacy” of South Africa’s case at the ICJ. This included engagement with colleagues at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

“Discussions are under way to try to secure greater access for humanitarian aid and to prevent ... the catastrophe that we expect will occur should there be an onslaught on Rafah. But all of us are working as colleagues across the world to end the slaughter and to ensure aid gets through to Rafah.”

Cost of ICJ case

When asked by IFP MP Mkhuleko Hlengwa about the costs of South Africa’s ICJ case, Pandor said: “The costs are not prohibitive” as officials are being paid from departmental budgets. 

“The other legal counsel has provided pro bono services. We appreciate this commitment.”

Exact figures could be made available, said the international relations minister, who later dismissed as a “fantasy” and “fairy tale” DA MP Emma Powell’s question on whether any foreign government or foreign interested party had helped to pay for the case.

“The notion that our government can’t carry the cost of the case we brought is just an attempt to diminish the importance of the principled stance of the government of South Africa,” replied Pandor.

Read more in Daily Maverick: Fact Check — Did Iran fund South Africa’s approach to the ICJ over Israel?

“I am so proud to be South African at this time... to have taken up the plight of thousands who have been killed for [doing] no ill by themselves whatsoever.”

Echoing President Cyril Ramaphosa’s statements closing the ANC’s January lekgotla on how South Africa’s ICJ case would trigger regime change and fightback campaigns, Pandor – who on Tuesday repeated the phrase “Israel’s genocidal intent” – said pushback could be expected “once you take up a case of this weight against very powerful forces”.

South Africa believed Hamas taking hostages during the 7 October attack was also a potential war crime that the International Criminal Court (ICC) should investigate.

South Africa has already referred Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the ICC in a matter separate from the ICJ genocide case. In addition, South Africa is among 51 countries that have argued before the ICJ that “acts akin to apartheid” were taking place in Gaza.

Pandor dismissed opposition comparisons of the Israel-Gaza war with that of the Ukraine-Russia war, even as ACDP MP Steve Swart highlighted the ICJ order for Russia to immediately stop its invasion of Ukraine. 

“There is no Nato country that is supplying arms to the Palestinians to defend themselves…” said Pandor. 

“All the support of the countries that provide support to Ukraine is given to Israel. So, you are not talking equivalence here.

“It is important we do not in one breath refer to Palestine and the occupation by Israel and its onslaught, and in the other, Ukraine and Russia...”

She reiterated South Africa’s continued diplomatic engagement with all stakeholders and others.

“We are seeking peace and we are seeking freedom and justice for the people of Palestine,” said Pandor.

Perhaps easier to answer was the EFF question of why the Israeli embassy in Pretoria was not yet closed, as recommended by a “politically persuasive” motion in Parliament on 21 November 2023.

“Cabinet is yet to deliberate and finalise this... Until Cabinet has made a decision, there could be no action,” said Pandor without providing any timelines. DM