Bryan Miller

South Africa’s claim of genocide by Israel turns the law on its head

For those unfamiliar with Public International Law, we should understand the difference between the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The ICJ is the primary judicial organ of the United Nations. Simply said, it is the Court that decides cases between members (countries) of the United Nations who voluntarily submit to its jurisdiction for determination of an outcome. The ICJ is housed in a magnificent building which is also known as the “Peace Palace” or the “World Court” and is seated in the Hague, Netherlands. The original monies were donated by Andrew Carnegie in 1903 and the Court opened in 1913. Today the Court is managed by the Carnegie Foundation, Netherlands.

A traditional case which would come before the ICJ would be a dispute such as borders (territorial or maritime). By way of example, Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) or Dispute over the Status and Use of the Waters of the Silala (Chile v. Bolivia).

In contrast the International Criminal Court (ICC) is meant to be an independent body with a Prosecutor who brings cases against leaders for violations of International Criminal Law based on the Rome Statute of 2002.

The articles of the Rome Statute, include Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, and War Crimes. Perhaps, the most renowned of these cases is the case against Omar Al Bashir for genocide in the Sudan. The case highlights a weakness in the ICC which is lack of an enforcement mechanism once an arrest warrant is issued.

The key differences between the two Courts are: states versus individuals and an old and respected Court versus the new ICC which is still in its teething phase. Indeed, it is questionable whether the ICC will survive.

The Rome Statute defines genocide as:

Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The key issue is whether the ICJ even has jurisdiction because there has to be intent. By way of background, Israel was attacked by an Iranian terrorist proxy group, Hamas. Hamas was elected by an overwhelming majority of Gazans in 2007, after former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered that all Israeli’s vacate Gaza, in 2005. There was no occupation of Gaza, indeed, the Gazans had the choice of Fatah (the PLO) who runs part of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) or Hamas. The Gazans also had the choice of turning the land into a thriving economy with industry and governance instead they chose a barbaric group with aim of annihilating Jews.

One could even argue that Gaza was a test trial to determine whether a two-state solution would work. It failed.

Over 1200 civilians were slaughtered in the most barbaric way which is hard to articulate on October 7, 2023.

Some, commentators have described Hamas as worse than the Nazis because of the glee in which they murdered Jews. Such as decapitating babies and burning them alive. The commentators argue that even the Nazis had to get drunk at night to forget their barbarity whereas as here, Hamas, videotaped their butchery and savagery and called their parents with joy as to the atrocities they committed.

It is Iran, via its proxy, Hamas, in the worst slaughter of Jewry since the Holocaust, that declared war on the Jews. Iran has not been shy about its Genocidal intent.

There is no plan or intent by Israel like at the Wannsee conference as to “The Final Solution was the code name for the systematic, deliberate, physical annihilation of the European Jews. At some still undetermined time in 1941, Adolf Hitler authorized this European-wide scheme for mass murder. Heydrich convened the Wannsee Conference” in  January 1942. Accessed, January 22, 2024,

If indeed there was a systematic, deliberate, physical plan to annihilate a population, it was by Iran’s proxy, Hamas. Holding Israel responsible for its defensive actions in Gaza turns the law on its head.

Was the United States put before a judicial body for genocide or war crimes for bombing Dresden to rubble in the Second World War or for its war in Iraq? No. In Israel’s action she has been meticulous in her compliance with International Humanitarian Law (the Laws of War which allows for the loss of civilian life).

Why South Africa? The African National Congress (ANC) is the ruling party in South Africa since the end of Apartheid circa. 1994. The ANC is rife with corruption and has turned a vibrant powerhouse of Africa into a failed state.

About six months ago the ANC was insolvent and unable to pay debts to creditors. A service provider was owed 120,000,000 Rand, obtained a judgment, and moved to dissolve the ANC. The matter was set for hearing in November 2023. As a judgment was entered against the ANC, the ANC was subject to what is akin to a debtors exam.

The ANC was unable to pay staff salaries for many months. Then the South African Minister of Foreign Affairs paid a visit to Tehran to express solidarity with the ‘Palestinians’ to be publicized on television. South Africa hosted a Hamas delegation after it propaganda mission to Tehran. After hosting the Hamas delegation South Africa filed a petition against Israel for breach of the Genocide Convention. The preliminary application cost about 200,000,000 Rand and the trial cost 1,500,000,000 (1.5 billion) Rand. Suddenly, the failed insolvent state announced its financial woes were over. See generally, Censored and removed.

Frans Cronje, former CEO for the Institute of Race Relations, was interviewed on the radio, January 12, 2024. See generally, The author herein, listened to the podcast earlier last week but the podcast has now been censored and removed. It would not be a giant leap to reach the conclusion that the blog was removed by the South African government as was the out of court settlement with its judgment creditor.

The podcast stands for the following propositions: (1) Iran’s proxy, South Africa, ultimate goal before the ICJ is delegitimization of Israel; (2) the goal of the ICJ case is to create the inference that Israel is a genocidal state; (3)  To alienate Jews in the diaspora from Israel. This fits tightly with Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) narrative.

That the United States has freed $166 billion of Iranian monies to fund the genocidal terrorists and at the same time offers conditional support for Israel’s right to self defense rises to the level of illogic and turns the law on its head.

About the Author
Bryan Miller is an ardent Zionist, was raised in South Africa, attended King David School, and for most of his professonal career has been a civil rights lawyer. Mid career he attended Leiden University in The Hague, Netherlands where he obtained an Advanced Master of Laws in Public International Law, International Criminal Law. He was a volunteer lawyer for the Israeli Embassy to The Hague in 2009-2010, for Harvey Kney-Tal.
Related Topics
Related Posts