A Palestinian medic reacts after several members of the Palestinian Red Crescent were killed when an Israeli strike hit an ambulance, according to the Red Crescent, in Deir al-Balah, in the central Gaza Strip Jan. 10, 2024.STRINGER/Reuters
The Liberal government, under pressure from a caucus divided on South Africa’s bid to take Israel to the International Court of Justice over its military actions in Gaza, is expected to declare its position Thursday, as hearings in the case begin in The Hague.
Some Liberal MPs, including former public safety minister Marco Mendicino, are pressing the government to reject South Africa’s claim that Israel’s military action in Gaza is “genocidal in character,” saying the assertion is “baseless and unconscionable.”
“I would strongly encourage our government to follow the United States in rejecting this action which would be consistent with the way we have treated previous claims against Israel,” Liberal MP Anthony Housefather said.
But other MPs within the Liberal caucus, including Salma Zahid, are calling on Canada to back South Africa’s motion publicly.
“These accusations deserve to be held in a proper legal forum,” she said. “There is support within the caucus for this. It is a good number of MPs.”
This is not the first time the Liberal caucus has been split over the Israel-Hamas war. Late last year, the Liberal caucus was divided on whether Canada should support a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. More than 20 Liberal MPs signed a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau calling on him to advocate for a ceasefire, which he subsequently did in December.
The motion to be heard this week in The Hague at the International Court of Justice alleges that Israel’s actions in Gaza, in response to the attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, are “genocidal in character.”
Countries around the world have been lining up to support or oppose South Africa’s application to the court, but Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly has yet to state Canada’s position, which is expected on Thursday.
The United States and Israel have both rejected the claim, filed at the ICJ last month by South Africa, saying it is without foundation.
The ICJ has scheduled a three-hour hearing on Thursday to hear South Africa’s request for an urgent court order to halt Israel’s military offensive and lift the Israeli siege of Gaza. Israel will present its case on Friday.
Both hearings had been scheduled for two hours each, but the court announced on Wednesday that Israel had requested an extra hour, so the hearings were expanded.
The merits of the full case could take years to settle, but legal experts predict that the court could rule within the next two weeks on the request for an urgent interim order, known as “provisional measures.”
The court could issue an order of some kind to constrain Israel’s actions in Gaza, the experts say, although the court lacks any enforcement mechanism and other countries have simply ignored the court’s rulings.
Rieaz Shaik, the South African high commissioner to Canada, said his country is not directly seeking Canada’s support for the South African court application. “We make no demands that others should join us,” he told a news conference on Wednesday. “Each country must examine their own conscience.”
He called for urgent action by the international court to respond to the South Africa application for a halt in the Israeli military offensive. “We ask forgiveness for not acting sooner,” he said.
Iddo Moed, Israel’s ambassador to Canada, said in an interview that Israel expects “all friendly countries in the world to speak out regarding this ludicrous accusation directed by South Africa against Israel which is completely unfounded, not by facts and not legally.”
Shimon Koffler Fogel, president and CEO, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, said Canada’s Jewish community expects the Canadian government to “denounce South Africa’s spurious charge.”
Israel’s closest ally, the United States, continued to criticize the South African application this week. The case is “meritless” and a distraction from other efforts to protect Gaza’s civilians, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told journalists in Tel Aviv on Tuesday.
“It’s particularly galling, given that those who are attacking Israel – Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, as well as their supporter, Iran – continue to openly call for the annihilation of Israel and the mass murder of Jews,” he said.
South Africa’s application has gained support from about a dozen countries in the Global South, including Brazil, along with the 57-nation Organization of Islamic Cooperation. It is also supported by hundreds of trade unions, human rights groups and other civil society groups worldwide, including about 150 in Canada who signed a joint statement this week.
“The complaint and urgent request for provisional measures is an important legal effort to curtail the ongoing destruction of Gaza and, crucially, the Palestinian population for whom Gaza is home,” the statement said.
Liberal MP Shafqat Ali said “South Africa has raised some serious issues” that require “determination by a properly constituted legal forum.”
“I expect that Canadians will respect the decisions of the court. In my view, our government should support the court and its processes as well as the decision it renders,” he said.
Liberal Chandra Arya also argued that Canada should support the South African motion. He said Canada argued recently at the ICJ, in a case about Myanmar, that evidence of genocide can include “a violent military operation triggering the forced displacement of members of a targeted group” and “subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the induction of essential medical services below minimum requirement.
“I don’t see how Canada can take a U-turn and argue against South Africa’s submission. Canada’s reputation and its right to claim a moral high ground on justice and humanitarian issues are at stake here,” he said.
In The Globe and Mail this week, Rosalie Silberman Abella, a former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, wrote in an opinion article that the case brought by South Africa “represents an outrageous and cynical abuse of the principles underlying the international legal order that was set up after the Second World War.”
Ms. Abella argued that it is Hamas, rather than Israel, that is guilty of attempting genocide.
“Hamas’s explicit and unapologetic goal is to eliminate Jews. The elimination of Jews is genocide. That is why Hamas murdered, raped, beheaded, kidnapped and tortured Jews on Oct. 7, 2023: to eliminate them, because they were Jews. It is a legal absurdity to suggest that a country that is defending itself from genocide is thereby guilty of genocide,” she wrote.
Mr. Mendicino said he agreed with Ms. Abella’s arguments, and said Canada should respect Israel’s right to defend its people from Hamas, which is listed as a terrorist organization under Canadian law.
“South Africa’s claim before the International Court of Justice that Israel is committing genocide is unconscionable,” he said. “Their case completely and inappropriately shifts the burden of proof to Israel to defend the charge of genocide, when in fact it is Hamas who explicitly states its intention is to obliterate the Jewish people.”
Conservative Party deputy leader Melissa Lantsman said that “Canada used to have a principled position on this issue, but now “the Foreign Minister has no position so that the backbenchers in the Liberal caucus can continue to play both sides.”
The NDP’s foreign affairs critic Heather McPherson on Tuesday wrote to Ms. Joly urging Canada to follow France’s lead and support South Africa’s motion.
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said her party welcomed the South African motion, and said Canada should support it.
Editor’s note: The photo caption above has been updated to attribute the report of deaths resulting from an Israeli strike to the Red Crescent. Attribution was left out in error in a previous version.