Global Media Got It Wrong
In her remarks, Donoghue clarified that the ICJ never determined there was a “plausible case” of genocide by Israel. Instead, the Court found only that the Palestinian people have a general right to be protected from genocide, a right enshrined in the UN Genocide Convention.
Donoghue explained:
“The Court did not decide that the claim of genocide was plausible. It only found that Palestinians have a right to be protected from genocide and that South Africa has the right to bring that claim before the Court.”
This clarification directly contradicts widespread international media reports that falsely claimed the ICJ had indicated Israel may be committing genocide in Gaza.
The UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) organization had already warned that such interpretations were incorrect, based on a misreading of the Court’s provisional measures. Following Donoghue’s statement, their legal analysis has now been fully vindicated.
The controversy also reached the UK, where hundreds of lawyers, including former Supreme Court judges — signed a letter urging sanctions against Israel. Their argument was based on the mistaken belief that the ICJ had found a “plausible risk of genocide.” Once the actual facts were clarified, criticism against the letter’s signatories mounted, with calls for them to retract their claims.
Ultimately, Donoghue’s words make the situation crystal clear:
The ICJ did not, at any point, determine that Israel is committing genocide.
The Court’s decision focused solely on preventing potential harm to civilians - not on validating accusations of genocide.
Comments
Post a Comment