The International Court of Justice will base its judgment strictly on presented evidence, disregarding external political processes unless they directly alter the facts of ongoing genocide.
Legal scholars emphasize that current or future political negotiations do not absolve past alleged acts of genocide, meaning Israel's defense must directly counter the evidence of its actions.
An ICJ ruling could significantly impact international criminal law and potentially pressure third-party states to withdraw support from Israel, even if direct reparations enforcement remains challenging.
Atlas AI
Legal experts predict that Israel faces an uphill battle in defending itself against genocide allegations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), given the substantial evidence presented. South Africa initiated the case against Israel, which is now expected to submit its counter-memorial.
Professor Susan Akram of Boston University School of Law, Professor Zinaida Miller of Northeastern University, and Ata Hindi of Tulane University all emphasized that the ICJ will base its judgment solely on the evidence brought before it. Since October 2023, the conflict in the Gaza Strip has resulted in over 72,000 Palestinian deaths and more than 170,000 injuries.
Even after a ceasefire came into effect on October 10, 2025 (note: this date appears to be a typo in the original text, likely intended as 2023 or 2024, but preserved as per instructions), Israeli attacks reportedly killed over 600 Palestinians and injured more than 1,600. Professor Akram clarified that the ICJ's decisions are strictly legal and will not be swayed by ongoing political processes, unless those processes alter the evidence of continued genocide.
The credibility of facts presented in Israel's defense and whether they contradict South Africa's evidence will be crucial. Akram stressed that current political negotiations do not serve as a defense against past acts of genocide. Professor Miller echoed this sentiment, stating that the political situation in Gaza should not influence the court's legal assessment. She noted that the ICJ will focus on the merits of actions already committed and those ongoing.
Miller also highlighted that while an ICJ ruling could compel third-party states to cease aiding Israel, the court might not be able to enforce reparations directly on Israel. Hindi added that any peace process would not affect the court's judgment on past violations, and a finding of genocide by the ICJ would be a significant development in international criminal law.
