Minister Ronald Lamola: Briefing to Parliament on South Africa vs Israel case at the ICJ

South Africa vs Israel case at the ICJ

Chairpersons of the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation and the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development
Honourable Members of both Committees

Thank you for providing the Department of International Relations and Cooperation the opportunity to brief you today on the legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice in the South Africa versus Israel matter, and also South Africa’s readiness to host the G20.

As per the guidance of the committee, I will deal with the matters to the extent possible.

I am accompanied by Director-General Zane Dangor and colleagues from the Office of the Chief State Law Advisor at DIRCO and the Sous Sherpa of the G20, Ambassador Xolisa Mabhongo.

As you may recall, Israel declared a state of war following Hamas’ attacks on 7 October 2023.

We condemned the attacks against civilians and called for the return of hostages, with the view that these may constitute war crimes. We continue to advocate for a sustainable approach to the protracted conflict, a substantive process which would address the Palestinian situation in totality.

Over time it has become increasingly clear that Israel’s response to 7 October was, at the very least, disproportionate.

It became apparent that Israel’s conduct was increasingly genocidal. As is the case today, social media and news outlets are awash with genocidal statements from influential office bearers in Israel, as well as numerous accounts of critical civilian infrastructure being targeted by countless bombs.

It is this conduct following the 7 October attacks that prompted South Africa to institute an application against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 29 December 2023, alleging that Israel was responsible for violations of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in Gaza. South Africa also requested the Court to indicate provisional measures orders in light of the urgency and gravity of the situation.

South Africa’s actions are in line with the country’s obligations under Article 9 of the Genocide Convention. This Article obligates contracting states to refer disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, including those relating to state responsibility for genocide, to the ICJ.

Honourable Members

As we gather here right now, Gaza and Palestinians are being wiped off the map.

In this presentation, you will hear that we have produced evidence of genocidal statements from prominent members of the Israeli government. One such statement being:
“Erase the memory of them. Erase them, their families, mothers and children. These animals can no longer live.”

International law and the global system of governance developed after the Second World War are under severe attack. It is important for the global majority who believe in a rules-based system, grounded in the UN Charter and international law, to stand up and protect the sanctity of the rule of law.

Should we stand back and remain silent when innocent civilians are killed or starved right before our eyes?

Where does impunity end?

Who should ensure that there is no exceptionalism?

Should we accept a world where over 60 000 people can be indiscriminately killed?

What would our silence imply?

Do we find the daily killing of journalists, health care workers and children—as well as the violations of international law—acceptable?

Do we not believe that preventing a genocide is a shared duty?

As the South African government, we have chosen to act in accordance with our constitutional values and international law obligations. We have chosen to be on the side of the global majority that has rejected these horrific actions.

Our case was rejected in some quarters as populist, blood libel, meritless and baseless.

Today, as we meet here, there is growing consensus on whether what we are all witnessing is indeed consistent with the public statements of Israeli leaders.

Archbishop Thabo Makgoba made the following observation in a TimesLIVE opinion piece dated 4 September 2025:
“In April 2024, Dr Tlaleng Mofokeng — the South African medical doctor serving as the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health — warned the Human Rights Council that the health system in Gaza had been ‘completely obliterated’ and that the right to health had been ‘decimated at every level’. By October 2024, she had introduced a new term for what she was witnessing — ‘medicide’: the use of military force and state policy to systematically destroy access to medical care. In June 2025, she declared that the right to health in Gaza had become ‘virtually non-existent’. Two Israeli organisations — B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel — have now produced reports that independently affirm Mofokeng’s findings.”

Honourable Members

I wish to remind you that Vaughan Lowe, King’s Counsel, acting on behalf of the South African government at the ICJ, told the Court the following:

“We have heard expressions of outrage that anyone could accuse Israel of acting in this way. We have heard sober assurances that Israel was doing and would do everything in its power to avoid civilian deaths as it exercised its claimed right of self-defence. We have heard boasts that Israel’s army is the most moral army in history. We have heard flat denials that there is famine in Gaza. For months people, particularly in the West, have appeared unwilling to accept that the accusations are true. How could people who look like us and sound like us possibly engage in anything like genocide?”

We offered an answer to the Court as part of our pleadings. Our Ambassador to The Hague, Mr Vusi Madonsela, said:

“These questions stem from a form of amnesia and denial by former colonial powers in relation to the crimes associated with colonial violence perpetrated against indigenous peoples. This includes the denial of genocide. This denial is clearly at play in Palestine.”

This denial of the genocide and atrocities by Israel—and the tacit condonation of these acts—have led to the questioning: Do some believe that Palestinian lives matter less than other lives?

By extension, it begs the question: do the ideologies of superiority that justified colonial conquest, occupations and genocides in Africa and elsewhere still determine which people are deserving of protection by international human rights law?

We reiterate that the international community cannot proclaim the importance of international law, including the UN Charter, in some situations and not in others.

International legal mechanisms are not only to be used to target Africans or those in the Global South. These are universal instruments aimed at justice for all.

Honourable Members

South Africa instituted proceedings before the ICJ to preserve the existence of the Palestinian people as a group, and to end all acts of apartheid and genocide against the Palestinian people.

As highlighted by the President in his State of the Nation Address, South Africa acted in accordance with its international obligations by instituting proceedings against Israel.

The case will continue until the Court makes a finding. The potential outcome could resonate far beyond Israel and Palestine. Inaction in the face of this conflict has a direct impact on how international humanitarian law is applied globally.

South Africa will continue to act within the institutions of global governance to protect fundamental human rights—including the right to life—in Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and anywhere there is conflict, including Gaza.

Our actions and approach resonate with the views of the global majority, including international civil society groups as well as Israeli and Palestinian analysts.

We have also joined initiatives such as the Hague Group, established to protect and uphold international obligations to end the illegal Israeli occupation and to support the realisation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including to self-determination and independence in a sovereign State of Palestine.

We recently co-chaired a meeting of the Group together with Colombia in Bogota, where 30 countries participated.

The establishment of the Hague Group and the Madrid Group seek the same outcome: an end to bloodshed, an immediate ceasefire, and negotiations toward a just peace.

In conclusion, let me stress that South Africa will continue to strive for the primacy of international law, promote accountability, and ensure a just peace.

We will also continue to call for two states—the State of Palestine and the State of Israel—to exist side by side in peace and security.

As we said to the UN General Assembly recently, all obstacles to the two-state solution should be removed. This includes:

• an immediate ceasefire and a commitment to a peace process
• the release of hostages by Hamas and political prisoners by the State of Israel
• the halting of illegal Israeli settlement expansion
• the removal of the illegal separation wall cutting across the Occupied Palestinian Territory
• the resumption of all internationally reputable humanitarian relief efforts and the reconstruction of Gaza, which can only take place once there is peace

Let me also take this opportunity to express our condolences to the victims of the terrorist attacks in Jerusalem.

I now give the floor to the Director-General to provide further details on the legal proceedings at the ICJ.

I thank you.

#GovZAUpdates