SA’s ICJ Case: A Futile and Costly Endeavor

South Africa’s ongoing case against Israel at the UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) has proven to be an expensive endeavor with little chance of producing a meaningful political solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana recently disclosed that the Memorial, or filing of evidence against Israel, has already cost South Africa R17.3 million, with additional expenses expected. Justice Minister Ronald Lamola further revealed that his department spent R1.94 million on travel and accommodations for officials managing the case. While this legal action may be well-intentioned, it is unlikely to yield any significant impact on the ground. Political problems, after all, require political solutions.

The costs are concerning in light of South Africa’s own pressing challenges. Despite having one of the world’s highest inequality rates, with over 1,770 schools still relying on hazardous pit toilets, South Africa is diverting millions to a legal battle far removed from its own borders. Statistics from SAPS and Stats SA indicate that approximately 22,000 South Africans were murdered last year alone—figures that surpass many conflict zones. Rather than allocating resources to these severe domestic issues, the government’s spending on international litigation is raising questions about misplaced priorities.

Malnutrition adds to the crisis. The Department of Health estimates that of the 15,000 children diagnosed with acute malnutrition annually, 1,000 die due to inadequate intervention, while another report links 10,000 child deaths each year to malnutrition. It’s troubling to see South Africa prioritize foreign conflicts over the preventable suffering of its own people. Addressing these urgent issues would save lives and create lasting impact.

Most nations prioritize domestic welfare before international interventions, but South Africa’s focus on foreign causes has placed its own citizens in a secondary position. Additionally, the government’s support of Hamas—a group internationally recognized as a terrorist organization—raises questions about impartiality and suggests that South Africa may be influenced by external actors like Iran, seeking to use South Africa as a tool to further their own goals.

South Africa’s apparent bias is reflected in its government’s response to recent attacks by Hamas or Hezbollah against Israel, effectively condoning these assaults while seeking legal action against Israel’s defensive measures. Over 1,200 Israelis were killed, 251 abducted, and daily missile attacks persisted. Most countries would take similar actions to protect their people, yet South Africa’s selective focus disregards this reality.

In pursuing this legal route, South Africa has lost numerous opportunities to promote dialogue and contribute constructively to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Choosing sides in a complex geopolitical issue does little to advance peace. Instead of escalating tensions, South Africa should leverage its diplomatic channels to bring both parties to the negotiation table. By advocating for constructive dialogue rather than perpetuating divisions, South Africa could contribute to a path of resolution and demonstrate a commitment to peace, both locally and globally.