THE HAGUE, January 11. /TASS/. The Israeli authorities are pursuing an apartheid policy against the people of Palestine, South Africa's representative to the UN International Court of Justice Vusumuzi Madonsela said.

"South Africa has recognized the ongoing [oppression] of the Palestinian people through Israel’s colonization since 1948, which has systematically and forcibly dispossessed, displaced and fragmented the Palestinian people," he noted. "We are also particularly mindful of Israel's institutionalized regime of discriminatory laws, policies and practices designed and maintained to establish domination, subjecting the Palestinian people to apartheid," he added. "The genocidal acts and omissions by the State of Israel inevitably form part of a continuum of illegal acts perpetrated against the Palestinian people since 1948," Madonsela emphasized.

The South African Republic has filed a lawsuit against Israel for allegedly violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) at the UN International Court of Justice in The Hague on December 29, 2023. The document asserts that the actions of the Israeli authorities can be characterized as genocide because they are committed with the intent "to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as part of the broader Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group." South Africa’s claim seeks a court order that Israel is in breach of its obligations under the genocide convention and must cease all hostilities in the Gaza Strip as well as pay reparations.

In addition, South Africa has demanded precautionary measures be taken to protect Palestinians from further, grave and irreparable violations of their rights and to ensure Israel's compliance with its obligations under the convention. That is the focus of this hearing, which will be held January 11-12. On the first day, the South African representatives will be given three hours to present their position. On the second day, the same amount of time will be granted to the Israeli side.

The court's verdict on the precautionary measures is expected to be delivered within a few weeks. The court's rulings are binding; however, the authority has no mechanism to enforce them.