ADUOL: ICJ didn't endorse South Africa's claims

In times when we expect journalists to be precise, accurate and knowledgeable, the members of the academia should abide by the same norms.

Reading the short version of the court’s decision, let alone, the full text, would have brought Oketch Kendo to the opposite conclusions. He wrote an oped titled ‘SA cracks years of Israel impunity’ in the January 31, 2024, edition of the Star newspaper.

We can definitely refer to the pre-hearing comments regarding South Africa’s baseless accusations against Israel, made by numerous states known for their commitment to the rule of law, denouncing both the content of South Africa’s claims, as well as the legitimacy of the move.

Let’s dwell on the legal procedure: One; This was only a preliminary discussion for provisional measures asked by South Africa. While the procedure demands the highest standard of evidence to condemn committing genocide, it only demands a very low standard of evidence for giving provisional measures.

The only question the ICJ ponders during these preliminary discussions is; if the accusations will later be established, will refraining from giving the provisional measures create irreversible damage?

Two; Most of the provisions required by South Africa were not granted. The ones that were, merely say Israel should keep doing what it already does – do whatever it can, while in a war, to refrain from causing civilian casualties, and facilitate humanitarian aid.

Three; The ICJ did not grant South Africa the provision asked to cease fire. On the contrary, the ICJ in its decision specifically said that Israel should adhere to the laws of war, suggesting that it can keep the war for self-defence. Not even one judge suggested adopting South Africa’s demand for a cease-fire. Not even one.

Four; The court stated that the declared (by South Africa) number of casualties is unverifiable. Still Kendo, for unknown reasons, chose to cite an unverifiable number. And we are asking – isn’t there even one terrorist among them? Not even one?

Kendo diminishing the atrocities Hamas committed against Israeli civilians on October 7 last year as merely an attack against partying youth was unfortunate. It was disturbing that such words came to print. Especially in a country such as Kenya, which has suffered terror attacks.

It was unfortunate to publish such a denial of a well-documented massacre against Israeli civilians in their own homes by Hamas terrorists. Coming on the heels of the commemoration of the genocide of European Jews during World War II—the Holocaust—one would think we’d have learnt a lesson.

The use of the term genocide while referring to a war indicates a complete lack of knowledge and understanding of WW2 and, especially, the Holocaust. It also indicates a lack of knowledge of the genocide in Rwanda, where more than one million Tutsi and moderate Hutu were killed.

It is a desecration of the memory of these millions.

Africa Bible Valley Project coordinator