The “specific intent” to commit genocide under the UN Genocide Convention of 1948: the Case of South Africa v. Israel before the International Court of Justice

In January 2024, a case brought by South Africa against Israel occupied the attention of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). South Africa has invoked the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, accusing Israel of carrying out genocidal acts during its military operations in Gaza, following the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023. Key charges include direct commission, complicity, and failure to prevent genocide. The ICJ responded to South Africa's request by issuing precautionary measures, without however ruling on whether genocide effectively occurred. These measures are intended to prevent further damage and preserve evidence. Specifically, Israel was instructed not to take actions that could aggravate the situation or jeopardize the resolution of the conflict, and to provide periodic reports on actions taken in response to the Court order. This legal provision is based on the "plausibility" of the accusations, a preliminary stage of the legal process which does not require conclusive proof, but only a sufficient indication that the accusations may be founded. The decision highlighted the complexity of the definition of genocide and the difficulty in demonstrating specific intent, which is essential for a final ruling of genocide under the Convention. International reactions have been polarized. Israel rejected the charges, citing the need to defend its sovereignty and national security against acts of terrorism, while various Palestine supporters interpreted the decision as recognition of the severity of Israeli operations in Gaza. The outcome of this case will not only influence international relations and the global perception of international humanitarian and human rights law but could also set an important precedent in the legal handling of genocide allegations. The next phase of the ICJ proceedings, which will include a more detailed examination of the evidence and legal arguments, will be crucial for the future of relations between Israel and the international community, as well as for the very concept of state responsibility in armed conflicts. In this survey we’ll try to examine whether the behavior of Israeli military forces might have conducted operations or actions falling within the hypothesis of genocide as provided for in the UN 1948 Convention, object of the legal dispute.