Other declarations on the court order:
Declaration of Judge Xue
She recalls the relevant United Nations resolutions where it is stated that “the
United Nations has a permanent responsibility towards the question of Palestine until the question is
resolved in all its aspects in a satisfactory manner in accordance with international legitimacy”. In
Judge Xue’s view, this responsibility requires that the United Nations, including its principal judicial
organ, ensures that the Palestinian people are protected under international law, particularly protected
from the gravest crime genocide.
Referring it back to the UN, but the case can proceed.
Dissenting opinion of Judge Sebutinde
Judge Sebutinde respectfully dissents from the majority in this Order, arguing that the dispute
between the State of Israel and the people of Palestine is essentially and historically a political one,
calling for a diplomatic or negotiated settlement, and for the implementation in good faith of all
relevant Security Council resolutions by all parties concerned, with a view to finding a permanent
solution whereby the Israeli and Palestinian peoples can peacefully coexist. In her opinion, this is not
a legal dispute susceptible of judicial settlement by the Court.
Also referring it back to the UN, UNSC, but saying the court should not investigate further at all.
Judge Sebutinde considers that the provisional measures indicated by the Court in the
Order are not warranted.
Declaration of Judge Bhandari
In his declaration, Judge Bhandari states that the attacks on civilians in Israel on 7 October
2023 must be condemned but notes that Israel’s military campaign in response to those attacks has
led to a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.
Judge Bhandari states that the Court must take into account the widespread destruction in Gaza and
loss of life that the population of Gaza has thus far endured. In Judge Bhandari’s view, the widespread
nature of the military campaign in Gaza, as well as the loss of life, injury, destruction and
humanitarian needs following from it, are by themselves capable of supporting a plausibility finding
with respect to rights under Article II.
Finally, Judge Bhandari states that all participants in the conflict must ensure that all fighting
and hostilities come to an immediate halt and that remaining hostages captured on 7 October 2023
are unconditionally released.
But wasn't able to push through cessation of hostilities as a provisional measure
Declaration of Judge Nolte
Judge Nolte submits a declaration in which he sets out the reasons for his agreement with the
Court’s decision to indicate provisional measures in respect of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In his view, the measures indicated rest primarily on the
plausible claim by South Africa that certain statements by Israeli State officials, including members
of its military, give rise to a real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights of
Palestinians under the Genocide Convention.
Basically believing Israel that all those statements are merely spur of the moment emotional exaggeration. Because it apparently wasn't enough to push for cessation of hostilities.
Israel's flimsy defense worked, we didn't really mean any of it, South Africa should have just talked with us, we're sending out warnings to civilians, designating 'safe' zones, letting aid in. Israel continues to get away with pooling the wool over everyone's eyes.
At least the case will proceed, but for now it won't change anything on the ground. Israel can just keep on blaming the UN for insufficient aid while repeating they do their best to adhere to international law. International law is a joke. The Genocide conventions useless to prevent genocidal actions.
Essay Pro