The ruling of the I.C.J.—which is distinct from the International Criminal Court—fell short of finding Israel guilty of having committed genocide, but such a decision could take years; South Africa had also urged the court to order an immediate ceasefire, which it did not do. (The court does not have an enforcement mechanism.) But the I.C.J. still found cause for great concern about Israel’s military actions, and also the statements of its leaders. “At least some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza,” the court found, “appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the [Genocide] Convention.”
I only have a few semesters of law behind me and in a language other than English, but I do know that legal language is incredibly precise and requires this same precision from the reader as well. “[A]ppear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the Convention” does not mean that this court determined that Israel is committing genocide, it means that it appears (which is a word that is used when something can not be determined with certainty) that some actions might do.
That is fundamentally different. I’m sure you noticed that the court did not order Israel to stop this war, merely to behave themselves while doing so. Do you really think they would have said something this toothless if they had determined that Israel was actually committing genocide?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/the-importance-of-the-icj-ruling-on-israel
I only have a few semesters of law behind me and in a language other than English, but I do know that legal language is incredibly precise and requires this same precision from the reader as well. “[A]ppear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the Convention” does not mean that this court determined that Israel is committing genocide, it means that it appears (which is a word that is used when something can not be determined with certainty) that some actions might do.
That is fundamentally different. I’m sure you noticed that the court did not order Israel to stop this war, merely to behave themselves while doing so. Do you really think they would have said something this toothless if they had determined that Israel was actually committing genocide?