[Just Security] Manifestly Illegal: Israeli International Law Scholars on the Stated Plan to “Concentrate” the Palestinian Population in South Gaza

[u/posixthreads]

https://www.justsecurity.org/116904/israeli-international-law-scholars-gaza/

[u/posixthreads]

This is actually a significant letter, as it is written by the very same lawyers that represented Israel before the ICJ against South Africa. This line in particular is surprising:

If implemented, the plan would constitute a series of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and under certain conditions, could amount to the crime of genocide.

Reading between the lines, I think the lawyers are telling their leaders "don't do this, or you will blow up our case".

[u/MarcAbaddon → u/[deleted]]

No, he was an ad hoc judge. As a courtesy the court can appoint someone with the nationality relevant to the case, but that judge is still supposed to be impartial. So not part of the Israeli legal team.

[u/Calvinball90 → u/MarcAbaddon]

It's not quite a courtesy, it is a right of parties before the court under article 31 of the ICJ Statute if there is not already a judge of that party's nationality. There is a South African ICJ judge (Dire Tladi), so it is not entitled to nominate a judge ad hoc, but Israel is-- it nominated Aharon Barak, but he resigned last year and was replaced by Ron Shapira.

[u/hellomondays → u/Calvinball90]

Kind of a sidebar question but what's the required qualifications for the judge that fufills this requirement? Is there some sort of voting mechanism or could a state appoint anyone they believe would be fit for the job?

[u/Calvinball90 → u/hellomondays]

Article 31(2) of the ICJ Statute doesn't impose any requirements, but it does include a recommendation:

Such person shall be chosen preferably from among those persons who have been nominated as candidates [for ICJ judge positions] as provided in Articles 4 and 5.

Article 4 reads, in relevant part (article 5 is more about the election procedure than qualifications):

The Members of the Court shall be elected by the General Assembly and by the Security Council from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration...

In the case of Members of the United Nations not represented in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, candidates shall be nominated by national groups appointed for this purpose by their governments under the same conditions as those prescribed for members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration by Article 44 of the Convention of The Hague of 1907 for the pacific settlement of international disputes.

And article 44 of the Hague Convention reads, in turn:

Each Contracting Power selects four persons at the most, of known competency in questions of international law, of the highest moral reputation, and disposed to accept the duties of Arbitrator...

That's the closest thing to formal requirements that there are. In practice, I would imagine that there hasn't been much need to elaborate past that because there isn't really a reason for a State to nominate a person who is obviously unqualified. Even if the intent were for the judge ad hoc to support the nominating State no matter what, it would still be preferable to nominate someone acceptable to other parties and the Court than someone who would not be.

[u/FurstRoyalty-Ties → u/Calvinball90]

Happy Cake day.

[u/rightswrites → u/posixthreads]

I’m curious how this relates to the current ICJ case. As I understand it, South Africa has already submitted its evidence and now it is Israel’s turn to reply. So will actions taken by Israel after South Africa’s submission even be considered in the current case, or will the ICJ only evaluate what’s in the evidence that South Africa has already submitted?

[u/posixthreads → u/rightswrites]

Every ICJ case follows this pattern:

1. Initial application and ruling on jurisdiction (Sudan v. UAE ended here due to "manifest lack of jurisdiction")

2. Applicant's memorial

3. Respondant's counter-memorial (due in Jan 2026)

4. If the applicant has more evidence that is not repeating what is in the memorial, they may submit a reply (basically a second memorial)

5. The respondant can then submit a rejoinder (Gambia v. Myanmar is already past this stage)

6. Court schedules oral proceedings and delivers final judgement

For South Africa v. Israel, step 6 isn't going to happen before early 2027. If we have extensions to deadlines, it will take longer. For example, Myanmar got multiple extensions. To answer your question, no, South Africa is not done. They are going to have a massive reply to drop. God help us if the war keeps going past 2026. South Africa would have to ask for an extension, because they need fact-finding missions and access to witnesses. If it gets pushed out too far, there will be new elections and balance of power could shift on the court.

[u/AzorJonhai]

This plan sucks butt. Not a fan.

[u/AutoModerator]

This post appears to relate to the Israel/Palestine conflict. As a reminder: this is a legal sub. It is a place for legal discussion and analysis. Comments that do not relate to legal discussion or analysis, as well as comments that break other subreddit and site rules, will be removed. Repeated and/or serious violations of the rules will result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/internationallaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

We require that each post and comment, to at least some degree, promotes critical discussion, mutual learning or sharing of relevant information. Posts that do not engage with the law or promote discussion will be removed.

[u/bomboclawt75]

So concentrate them in a camp?

And this is all legal?

Like a lot of their actions are totally legal, right?

[u/internationallaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

We require that each post and comment, to at least some degree, promotes critical discussion, mutual learning or sharing of relevant information. Posts that do not engage with the law or promote discussion will be removed.

[u/internationallaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

We require that each post and comment, to at least some degree, promotes critical discussion, mutual learning or sharing of relevant information. Posts that do not engage with the law or promote discussion will be removed.