- Thread starter
- Staff
- #1
Dadparvar
Staff member
- Nov 11, 2016
- 10,594
- 0
- 6
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) denied South Africa’s request for urgent safeguards in Gaza in the form of additional measures Friday, as Israel appears to be preparing a ground invasion of Rafah.
Israel responded to the request Thursday, requesting it be rejected on the basis that it lacked legal or factual basis. South Africa submitted the request February 12 in response to the threat of a ground invasion by Israeli troops in Rafah, where 280,000 Palestinians are taking refuge.
The application was made under Article 75(1) of the Rules of Court of the International Court of Justice to “prevent further imminent breach of the rights of Palestinians in Gaza.” It noted that the “recent developments in Rafah” would exacerbate the already deteriorating humanitarian situation. South Africa added that it “reserves its own rights to take further action in respect of the situation.”
Israel, in its response, called the application an attempt to “misuse the Court’s provisionary measures procedure, this time by a highly peculiar and improper request that makes reference to Article 75(1) of the Rules of Court.” It noted in its response that South Africa cited a “significant development” in the situation between Israel and Gaza, but asserted that there has been no such development. Israel reiterated that it is committed to observing international law, and that the request failed to mention Hamas and demonstration of “contempt for the law.”
In the Court’s decision, it stated:
The post ICJ denies South Africa request for additional protection measures in Rafah appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.
Israel responded to the request Thursday, requesting it be rejected on the basis that it lacked legal or factual basis. South Africa submitted the request February 12 in response to the threat of a ground invasion by Israeli troops in Rafah, where 280,000 Palestinians are taking refuge.
The application was made under Article 75(1) of the Rules of Court of the International Court of Justice to “prevent further imminent breach of the rights of Palestinians in Gaza.” It noted that the “recent developments in Rafah” would exacerbate the already deteriorating humanitarian situation. South Africa added that it “reserves its own rights to take further action in respect of the situation.”
Israel, in its response, called the application an attempt to “misuse the Court’s provisionary measures procedure, this time by a highly peculiar and improper request that makes reference to Article 75(1) of the Rules of Court.” It noted in its response that South Africa cited a “significant development” in the situation between Israel and Gaza, but asserted that there has been no such development. Israel reiterated that it is committed to observing international law, and that the request failed to mention Hamas and demonstration of “contempt for the law.”
In the Court’s decision, it stated:
There are ongoing proceedings between South African and Israel at the ICJ which were launched in December 2023. The proceedings were launched by South Africa against Israel for alleged violations of Israel’s obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
The post ICJ denies South Africa request for additional protection measures in Rafah appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.