{"id":17644,"date":"2024-07-16T09:11:37","date_gmt":"2024-07-16T15:11:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sensorialsunsets.com\/spains-request-to-the-icj-on-gaza-israel\/"},"modified":"2024-07-16T11:07:31","modified_gmt":"2024-07-16T17:07:31","slug":"spains-request-to-the-icj-on-gaza-israel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sensorialsunsets.com\/en\/spains-request-to-the-icj-on-gaza-israel\/","title":{"rendered":"Spain’s Request To The ICJ On Gaza\/Israel"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Original title: “Gaza \/ Israel: some notes on the request for intervention presented by Spain before the International Court of Justice (ICJ)”. Text written by Professor Nicol\u00e1s Boeglin, from the Law School of the University of Costa Rica.<\/em><\/p>\n\n

\n\n
<\/div>\n\n

On June 28, 2024, Spain submitted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) a formal request for intervention. It is a request for intervention as a third State in the dispute between South Africa and Israel: the text of the official ICJ communiqu\u00e9 is available in French<\/a><\/strong> and English<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n

Spain’s formal request for intervention, which is based on Article 63 of the ICJ Statute, is now available at this link<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n

\"Nicolas
Photo taken from press article<\/a><\/strong> published in Israel on July 8, 2024, and entitled “‘I’m bored, so I shoot’: the Israeli army’s approval of free-for-all violence<\/strong>“, Magazine+972 (Israel), recommended reading. In France this text was translated into French by the NGO AURDIP under the title \u00ab Je m’ennuie, alors je tire ” : l’arm\u00e9e isra\u00e9lienne approuve la violence gratuite \u00e0 Gaza<\/em> \u00bb, and was published on July 14 in this link<\/a><\/strong><\/em>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n
<\/div>\n\n

In these days of July 7-10, several States again condemned Israel’s bombardment of schools and refugee camps in Gaza, which has been repeatedly observed since July 6 (see note<\/a><\/strong> by France24 in English). While some expressly referred to Israel in the text of their communiqu\u00e9 (see for example the communiqu\u00e9<\/a><\/strong> of Turkey or that of Indonesia<\/a><\/strong>), others such as Costa Rica (see official communication<\/a><\/strong>), omitted any express reference to Israel (Note 1<\/strong>).<\/p>\n\n

Spain Gaza Israel<\/h6>\n\n

With respect to Costa Rica, similar “omission<\/em>” could be observed comparing in May 2024, Costa Rica’s text (see official communiqu\u00e9<\/a><\/strong> of May 27 –Note 2<\/strong>) with those of Brazil (see statement<\/a><\/strong>), Chile (see text<\/a><\/strong>), Colombia (see text<\/a><\/strong>) or from Mexico (see text<\/a><\/strong>) regarding Israel’s bombing of a camp of refugees and displaced persons in Rafah in Gaza.<\/p>\n\n

Still on the subject of the ICJ and Palestine (and … Costa Rica), it is worth noting that on July 19 the ICJ will release its advisory opinion on Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory (see official communiqu\u00e9<\/a><\/strong> of the ICJ on July 12): our esteemed readers may remember an article of ours published in February 2023, in which we pointed out how unusual was the vote of Costa Rica registered in December 2022 in the United Nations General Assembly, entitled “Latin America before request for an advisory opinion to international justice on the situation in Palestine, brief notes on unusual vote against Costa Rica<\/em>” (see text<\/a><\/strong>, digital media LaRevistacr<\/em>, edition of February 4, 2023).<\/p>\n\n

Spain’s Request Shortly<\/h3>\n\n

En las 15 p\u00e1ginas del texto de su solicitud del pasado 28 de junio, Espa\u00f1a refiere a la interpretaci\u00f3n de varias disposiciones de la Convenci\u00f3n contra el Genocidio de 1948 que, como Estado Parte de la misma, pretende que sea tomada en cuenta por los jueces de la CIJ a la hora de considerar el fondo de la demanda interpuesta por Sud\u00e1frica contra Israel.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

On page 6 we read that, for Spain, the intentionality of genocide, on which some States (close to Israel) want the ICJ to focus its analysis, should be complemented with other criteria:<\/p>\n\n

\n

24<\/strong>. In Spain’s opinion, precisely because direct evidence of genocidal intent is rare, it is crucial to interpret the do\/us specialis requirement with a balanced approach that recognizes the singular gravity ofthe crime of genocide, without rendering the threshold for inferring genocidal intent so difficult to meet so as to make findings of genocide nearimpossible.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

\n

25<\/strong>. In this regard, Spain considers that the standard adopted by the Court in Croatia v. Serbia provides the basis for such a balanced approach. The Court highlights the central importance of reasonableness by observing that “[t]he notion of ‘reasonableness’ must necessarily be regarded as implicit in the reasoning of the Court,” not least to avoid an approach that would make it “impossible to reach conclusions by way of inference.” Thus, when determining whether specific intent can be inferred from conduct or not, one must weigh the evidence, and filter out inferences that are not reasonable. Put differently, the “only reasonable inference” test applies only between alternative explanations that have been found to be reasonably supported by the evidence<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

As a State Party to the 1948 Genocide Convention, Spain seeks to make the ICJ judges aware that they should also be guided by the interpretations that best respond to the spirit of the Convention. That is why it seeks to intervene on the basis of Article 63 of the ICJ Statute, which reads as follows:<\/p>\n\n

\n

Art\u00edculo 63<\/strong>:\u00a0\u00a01. Cuando se trate de la interpretaci\u00f3n de una convenci\u00f3n en la cual sean partes otros Estados adem\u00e1s de las partes en litigio, el secretario notificar\u00e1 inmediatamente a todos los Estados interesados.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

\n

2. Todo Estado as\u00ed notificado tendr\u00e1 derecho a intervenir en el proceso; pero si ejerce ese derecho, la interpretaci\u00f3n contenida en el fallo ser\u00e1 igualmente obligatoria para \u00e9l<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

In another paragraph of its request to the international judge in The Hague, it is stated that, for Spain, the United Nations reports must be taken into account by the international judge (despite the angry disqualifications that Israel expresses with each new report produced by the United Nations on the situation in Gaza):<\/p>\n\n

\n

30.\u00a0<\/strong>Spain considers that, when assessing whether the acts described in Article II of the Convention have been committed, the International Court of Justice, as the primary judicial body of the United Nations, should take into account the data, facts and reports produced by the United Nations, its agencies and bodies, and by other reliable sources with authoritative knowledge of the situation in Gaza. In Spain’s view, examining the results of independent investigations under the auspices of the United Nations before qualifying a situation as genocide is a good practice that should be applied to the present case<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

We recommend to our esteemed readers the complete review of Spain’s request for intervention, as the text contains many other points on which Spain intends to lead the ICJ judges to reflect, when analyzing Israel’s military actions in Gaza since the afternoon\/evening of October 7, 2023. <\/p>\n\n

It should be recalled that the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide<\/em>” (see fulltext<\/a><\/strong>) dates from 1948 and, that some of its provisions merit an evolutionary interpretation.<\/p>\n\n

An Action Preceded By Other Similar Efforts<\/h3>\n\n

Spain’s application for intervention is in addition to other applications of this type that we had the opportunity to analyze previously, namely the applications submitted by the following States: <\/p>\n\n