By V.E.K.Madhushani, Jadetimes News
In the context of the ongoing Gaza conflict, concerns have been raised about whether Israel is taking sufficient measures to prevent and address alleged incitement to genocide. These concerns have been fueled by controversial statements from high profile Israeli figures, particularly as the country’s military continues its operations in Gaza following the deadly Hamas attack on Israel on October 7th.
Controversial Statements and Legal Actions
One significant incident involved Nissim Vaturi, the Deputy Speaker of Israel's Knesset, who posted inflammatory comments on social media in November. After posting “Burn Gaza now, nothing less!” on X (formerly Twitter), his account was temporarily blocked until he deleted the comment. While he complied with the platform's request, Vaturi did not issue an apology. This comment, along with another statement from Vaturi on the day of the Hamas attack where he advocated for the "erasing of the Gaza Strip," has drawn international scrutiny. Notably, these statements were cited in South Africa's case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where Israel is accused of committing genocide against Palestinians during the ongoing Gaza conflict. Israel has dismissed these allegations as unfounded and biased.
ICJ Ruling and Israel’s Response
In January, the ICJ issued an interim ruling requiring Israel to prevent public statements inciting genocide. Although the ICJ lacks enforcement power, Israel agreed to submit a report detailing its efforts to investigate and prosecute potential instances of incitement. The ICJ confirmed receipt of the report in February, but its contents have not been made public. Some legal experts argue that Israel is not doing enough to address this issue. Michael Sfard, an Israeli human rights lawyer, suggests that individuals who incite genocide or use genocidal rhetoric in Israel are often immune from prosecution. This is particularly concerning given the difficulty in proving incitement to genocide, which is a crime under both international and Israeli law.
Examining Statements and Their Impact
Several pronouncements made by Israeli officials and public figures since the ICJ's order have raised questions about whether they violate the ruling. For instance, Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s far right National Security Minister, has advocated for policies that critics describe as incitement to genocide. Ben Gvir has called for encouraging Palestinians to leave Gaza and for Israelis to settle in the territory, a policy viewed by some as ethnic cleansing. However, others argue that such statements, while extreme, do not meet the legal definition of genocide.
Religious leaders in Israel have also been scrutinized. Rabbi Eliyahu Mali, head of a yeshiva that blends Torah study with military service, made controversial remarks during a conference in March. He cited ancient religious texts advocating the killing of enemies but clarified that in the modern context, such actions would be harmful and illegal. Despite this clarification, his statements have sparked calls for an investigation into possible incitement to genocide, violence, and terrorism.
Media and Public Discourse
The issue of incitement extends to Israeli media, where some journalists have made inflammatory remarks about the people of Gaza. These statements have been criticized for lacking empathy but are not universally recognized as genocidal incitement. Legal experts warn that while freedom of speech is protected, it is crucial for the state to ensure that public broadcasting is not misused for incitement.
International and Domestic Reactions
While the ICJ ruling specifically targeted Israel, Hamas has also faced accusations of making statements with genocidal intent. Hamas leaders have made repeated threats to carry out attacks similar to the one on October 7th, which resulted in significant loss of civilian life and numerous hostages taken. Legal experts argue that Hamas, which is classified as a terrorist organization by several countries, has clear genocidal intent. However, the group cannot be brought before the ICJ since it is not a state; instead, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction to hold individuals accountable. In May, the ICC's prosecutor sought arrest warrants for Hamas leaders and Israeli officials alike for crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Israeli Legal Proceedings
Within Israel, authorities have acknowledged the potential criminal nature of statements calling for harm to civilians. Despite this, recent reports suggest that no criminal investigations have been opened against senior public figures for incitement. The final decision on whether to pursue such investigations rests with the Attorney General. Israel’s Ministry of Justice has emphasized the need to balance freedom of speech with the prevention of harmful incitement, indicating that law enforcement efforts to address this issue have been intensified in recent months.
As the ICJ continues to deliberate on the case brought by South Africa, the situation in Gaza remains dire, with significant loss of life reported since the conflict escalated in October. The ongoing debate over incitement to genocide underscores the complex legal and moral challenges facing Israel and the broader international community in addressing the conflict.
