SHOCK Shift At The ICJ Worst Possible News For Israel!

Right, so matters have just taken a distinct turn for the worse for Israel at the International Court of Justice, because where they thought matters might have swung in their favour following the resignation of ICJ President Nawaf Salam to take up the post of Prime Minister of Lebanon, ridding them of a judge at the ICJ from a nation they are currently invading, who had a deciding vote at that, matters have now slammed fully back into reverse.
You see following Salam’s departure, the vice President of the ICJ took over, the one judge on the ICJ 15 person panel you absolutely didn’t want in charge, the avowedly pro Israel Christian Zionist from Uganda Julia Sebutinde, who’s filling in for Salam I have covered previously.
It was figured that she would see out the remainder of Salam’s elected term as President up to 2027, but in a sign of what could be taken as something of a no confidence vote in her, and not without good reason, an election was instead called to fill Salam’s vacant post for the reminder of his term, and she didn’t win. The guy who has, might just be Israel’s worst nightmare.
Right, so the International Court of Justice, the ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, the mosrt powerful court on the planet has elected Japanese judge Yuji Iwasawa as its new president, which is a development that could have profound implications for Israel’s ongoing genocide case brought by South Africa against them and none of it is good news for them.
Iwasawa’s election comes at a critical juncture in international law, this case will define them in terms of the credibility like no other in modern times, it is easily one of the most contentious and high-profile cases in its history. SO the significance of Iwasawa’s appointment, his background, and his stance on Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank are particularly noteworthy, we all need to know a bit about this guy and why he’s potentially bad news for Israel, particularly in light of critical statements he has issued regarding Israeli aggression in the Middle East.
So who is this guy then Damo? Well, Yuji Iwasawa, is the Japanese jurist on the ICJ, 70 years of age, he brings considerable experience and expertise to the ICJ presidency and after Sebutinde and the revelations about her having come to light, restores some sense of credibility to the ICJ once more. Iwasawa was elected to the court in 2018, with a CV bursting at the seams of a background in international law, human rights, and constitutional law. He served as a professor at the University of Tokyo and has been a member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, where he contributed to the interpretation and implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, therefore all in all, we have here a civil, political and human rights motivated lawyer taking the top spot at the ICJ with academic and professional credentials that make him a highly respected figure in the field of international law.
However, it is Iwasawa’s record on the ICJ that has drawn particular attention in the context of the ICJ’s current caseload, most especially in the case of South Africa vs Israel.
You see, Iwasawa has been a vocal critic of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories, particularly its discriminatory practices in the West Bank, a quote from the Emirati based news outlet The National News very much spelling his position out:
‘The ICJ also declared last July that Israel's occupation of the West Bank was unlawful and should end "as rapidly as possible". In that case, Mr Iwasawa wrote a separate opinion saying the court should have gone further in criticising Israeli practices.
"The discriminatory aspect of the dual legal system introduced by Israel in the West Bank deserved more attention," he wrote. "While settlers are subject to Israeli criminal law, Palestinians living in the West Bank are governed by military law and prosecuted in military courts.
"Differential treatment between Palestinians and settlers is also found in the national health insurance law, taxation law, election law, and in the enforcement of traffic laws ... the dual legal system introduced by Israel in the West Bank treats Palestinians and settlers differently."
Mr Iwasawa said the decision that Israel's actions were illegal "relates to the entirety of the occupied Palestinian territory, including Gaza".’
Statements such as these suggest Iwasawa has a strong commitment to upholding international law and human rights, and this has led many to view his election as a potential turning point in the ICJ’s handling of the genocide case against Israel.
That case of course is still very much ongoing, brought by South Africa against Israel at the ICJ accuses the latter of committing genocide in Gaza, a charge that has sparked intense debate with various nations coming out for one side or another. South Africa’s application alleges that Israel’s military operations in Gaza, including the targeting of civilians and the destruction of infrastructure, constitute acts of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention, a case the ICJ have accepted has been plausibly demonstrated and in light of that has drawn widespread attention, with human rights organisations and international observers closely monitoring the proceedings.
Israel has vehemently denied the allegations, arguing that its actions in Gaza are acts of self-defence against Hamas, but it hasn’t taken a genius to point to the disproportionate use of force, the high civilian death toll, and the systemic displacement of Palestinians as evidence of genocidal intent, the denial of aid, the staggering litany of war crimes that are being evidenced to point to the weakness in the Israeli defence. The ICJ’s handling of the case is seen as a litmus test for the court’s ability to hold powerful states accountable for violations of international law.
A 750 page submission by South Africa has been received by the ICJ in relation to their ongoing case and although this has not been published as is typical for live cases at the ICJ, Israel currently having until July of this year to respond to that submission and that is where the case is currently sat at.
Iwasawa’s election as ICJ president and the removal of Julia Sebutinde from the de facto top spot has been widely viewed as a bit of a blow for Israel, particularly given his critical stance on Israeli policies in the occupied territories. His appointment signals a major shift in the ICJ’s likely ongoing approach to the genocide case, with a greater emphasis on accountability and justice for victims of state violence.
One of the key concerns for Israel is Iwasawa’s commitment to impartiality and the rule of law. Unlike Julia Sebutinde who is avowedly sympathetic to Israel’s position, Iwasawa has a track record of challenging state impunity and advocating for the rights of marginalised communities, he is after all a human right lawyer. This could make it more difficult for Israel to deflect criticism or avoid accountability in the genocide case brought against them. Iwasawa’s election is expected to bring a renewed focus on the principles of international law being upheld, and Israel faces the prospect of being properly held to account once more at the ICJ.
Moreover, Iwasawa’s election comes at a time when Israel is facing increasing international scrutiny over its actions in Gaza. The United Nations, human rights organisations, and even some of Israel’s traditional allies have expressed concern over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the alleged violations of international law particularly as the Gaza ceasefire is collapsing, the withdrawal of aid into the Strip. Iwasawa’s presidency it is now hoped will impose additional pressure on Israel to justify its actions and comply with international legal standards and be found wanting where that clearly is not the case.
Of course the election of Iwasawa also raises questions about the role of interim ICJ President Julia Sebutinde, who has been criticised for her blatant bias in favour of Israel, seemingly borne out of the Christian Zionist church which has been such a huge influence on her and which has led her to vote in Israel’s favour in every single ICJ vote thusfar taken in relation to the case brought by South Africa.
For instance, in a previous advisory case on the legality of Israel’s occupation of Palestine, mandated on the court by the UN, Sebutinde had insisted that the Palestinians were not subject to military occupation at all, despite that being the case since 1967 and in her conclusions decided that Israel actually in her view, had every right to maintain a permanent presence in the West Bank and all of Jerusalem, on the basis not of law, but on what the bible says, making a complete mockery of the rule of law if Sebutinde’s own religious leanings end up superceding that.
The ICJ plays a crucial role in upholding the principles of international law and ensuring accountability for violations. There is no biblical exception to that and Sebutinde has caused significant distress, and ire, especially back in her home country of Uganda, as they have sought to distance themselves from her motivations, so to have held this election and filled Nawaf Salam’s vacant spot, makes you wonder what the other judges on the ICJ think of Sebutinde themselves.
That’s not to say Iwosawa takes over at an easy time though. The court is overseeing a politically charged case, operating in a highly politicised environment, where attempts to impose undue influence to proceedings has often been blatant all in the name of helping Israel avoid accountability.
Where Sebutinde’s chairmanship gave people a sense of despair with the case, Iwasawa’s presidency will be a test of the ICJ’s independence and its ability to resist political pressure and get matters back on track, putting trust back into the court, even with Sebutinde still on the ICJ panel. The outcome of the genocide case against Israel will be a key indicator of the court’s effectiveness in addressing state violence and upholding international legal norms, because we’ve observed this genocide in real time over social media, the plausible case for genocide has been demonstrated already, there is surely no way Israel can evade a ruling being made against it in due course? Lets hope the right guy to preside over this is in place, because the noise coming from pro Israel ends of the spectrum imply he could be.
Meanwhile, for more on why Julia Sebutinde’s taking over from Nawaf Salam as vice President was seen as such a disaster and why she is the way she is, check out this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch. Please do also hit like, share and subscribe to the channel as well, so you don’t miss out on all new daily content as well as supporting the work I do here which is of course massively appreciated and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks.