Skip to content

Rank

30

New New this week

OtherGovernment power & public lawGovernment and public law

South Africa v. Israel

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel)

South Africa accuses Israel of genocide in Gaza before the ICJ

At stake
Unquantified
Score
72.8Out of 100
Latest event
May 20264 months ago
Next step
Not scheduledNothing dated on the record yet
Commenced
Dec 20232 yr 9 mo ago
Court
International Court of JusticeGeneral List No. 192

Stage

Pre-trial. Motions, discovery and case management before any trial. How cases are placed

  1. Filed
  2. Pre-trialNow
  3. Trial
  4. Decision
  5. Appeal
  6. Enforcement

South Africa alleges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Israel’s military campaign in Gaza breaches the Genocide Convention, which Israel denies. The Court indicated provisional measures three times in 2024, and the case is now in the written merits phase. South Africa’s Reply is due on November 22, 2027, and Israel’s Rejoinder on May 22, 2029.

Latest development May 2026

On May 21, 2026, the Court fixed November 22, 2027, as the deadline for South Africa’s Reply and May 22, 2029, for Israel’s Rejoinder. The order followed a procedural meeting with the parties on April 29, 2026. The written phase of the merits is now scheduled to close in May 2029.

Why it matters

The ICJ will decide whether Israel’s military conduct in Gaza breaches the Genocide Convention and engages Israel’s state responsibility. Its reading of the Convention matters to both parties and to the many states that have sought to intervene.

Background

South Africa instituted proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on December 29, 2023. It alleges that Israel’s military campaign in the Gaza Strip breaches the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention). The campaign followed the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. South Africa asked the Court to indicate provisional measures and, ultimately, to find Israel responsible for genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel denies the allegations, argues that it is exercising its right to self-defense against Hamas, and contests both the Court’s jurisdiction and the plausibility of South Africa’s claims.

After hearings on January 11 and 12, 2024, the Court found on January 26, 2024, that it was plausible that Israel’s conduct could violate Palestinians’ rights under the Genocide Convention. It indicated provisional measures requiring Israel to prevent genocidal acts, prevent and punish incitement, preserve evidence, and report back to the Court. On South Africa’s further requests, the Court ordered Israel on March 28, 2024, to ensure unimpeded humanitarian access amid famine conditions. On May 24, 2024, by 13 votes to 2, it ordered Israel to halt its offensive in the Rafah Governorate. None of these orders determines the merits, and Israel’s compliance has remained contested.

Numerous states have sought to intervene, filing applications or declarations under Articles 62 and 63 of the Court’s Statute. They included Nicaragua, Colombia, Libya, Mexico, Palestine, Spain, Türkiye, Chile, the Maldives, Bolivia, Cuba, Ireland, and Belize. The Comoros, Belgium, Paraguay, the Netherlands, Iceland, Namibia, the United States, Hungary, and Fiji filed declarations later, between October 2025 and March 2026. Colombia withdrew its April 2024 declaration in September 2026, after a change of government restored its ties with Israel. Israel appointed the late Aharon Barak as judge ad hoc and, after his resignation in July 2024, Ron Shapira, while South Africa appointed Dikgang Moseneke.

On April 5, 2024, the Court fixed October 28, 2024, for South Africa’s Memorial on the merits and July 28, 2025, for Israel’s Counter-Memorial. South Africa filed its Memorial on October 28, 2024. Israel received successive extensions, the last of which the Court’s president granted on October 20, 2025, citing evidentiary issues over hyperlinked documents in the Memorial. Israel filed its Counter-Memorial on March 12, 2026. On May 21, 2026, after a procedural meeting on April 29, 2026, the Court fixed November 22, 2027, for South Africa’s Reply and May 22, 2029, for Israel’s Rejoinder.

Timeline 23 events

  1. Order
    Colombia withdraws its declaration of intervention

    Colombia informed the Court it was withdrawing the Article 63 declaration it filed in April 2024, following a change of government that restored ties with Israel.

    ICJ Press Release: Colombia withdraws its Declaration of interventionColombia withdraws from South Africa's ICJ lawsuit against Israel, court says

  2. Order
    Court sets 2027 and 2029 deadlines for Reply and Rejoinder

    The order fixed November 22, 2027, for South Africa’s Reply and May 22, 2029, for Israel’s Rejoinder. It followed a procedural meeting on April 29, 2026.

    Presidency notes ICJ order of 21 May 2026

  3. Order
    Court president meets parties on procedural timetable

    Representatives of South Africa and Israel met with the Court’s president in The Hague to discuss the next procedural steps, leading to the May 2026 scheduling order.

    Presidency notes ICJ order of 21 May 2026

  4. Filing
    Namibia, U.S., Hungary and Fiji file declarations of intervention

    The four states each filed declarations under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute the same day Israel submitted its Counter-Memorial.

    Four States File Declarations of Intervention in South Africa v. Israel

  5. Filing
    Israel files Counter-Memorial

    Israel submitted its written Counter-Memorial responding to South Africa’s Memorial by the extended deadline.

    Presidency notes ICJ order of 21 May 2026

  6. Filing
    Netherlands and Iceland file declarations of intervention

    Both states invoked Article 63 to intervene shortly before Israel’s Counter-Memorial deadline.

    ICJ: Declarations of intervention filed by the Netherlands and by Iceland

  7. Filing
    Paraguay files declaration of intervention

    Paraguay filed a declaration of intervention under Article 63, and South Africa and Israel were invited to submit written observations on it.

    ICJ: Paraguay files a declaration of intervention

  8. Filing
    Belgium files declaration of intervention

    Belgium sought to intervene under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute, joining a growing list of states seeking a role in the Court’s interpretation of the Genocide Convention.

    Press releases

  9. Filing
    Comoros files declaration of intervention

    The Comoros invoked Article 63 of the ICJ Statute to file a declaration of intervention in the proceedings.

    ICJ Press Release: The Comoros files a declaration of intervention

  10. Order
    Court extends Israel’s Counter-Memorial deadline to March 2026

    The President of the Court granted Israel a further extension, citing unresolved evidentiary issues over hyperlinked documents in South Africa’s Memorial.

    ICJ grants Israel another extension to respond in genocide case brought by South AfricaSAI Order of 20 October 2025

  11. Filing
    Ireland files declaration of intervention

    Ireland became one of more than 10 states to seek to intervene under Article 63, following Türkiye, Chile, Bolivia, and others in 2024.

    South Africa's genocide case against Israel

  12. Filing
    South Africa files Memorial on the merits

    South Africa submitted its Memorial, reportedly with extensive evidentiary material, by the Court’s October 28, 2024, deadline.

    Order of 21 May 2026

  13. Other
    Barak resigns as Israel’s judge ad hoc and Israel names Shapira

    Aharon Barak resigned for personal reasons, and Israel named Ron Shapira as his successor.

    Prof. who called ICJ 'unworthy of any trust' tapped as Israel's judge in genocide case

  14. Filing
    State of Palestine files declaration of intervention

    The government of the State of Palestine filed the declaration in support of South Africa’s application.

    South Africa's genocide case against Israel

  15. Filing
    Mexico files declaration of intervention

    Mexico filed a declaration seeking to intervene under Article 63, the same day the Court ordered Israel to halt its Rafah offensive.

    South Africa v. Israel case page listing interventions

  16. Other
    Court orders Israel to halt Rafah offensive

    By 13 votes to 2, the Court reaffirmed its earlier measures. It also ordered Israel to halt any action that could inflict conditions bringing about the Palestinian group’s physical destruction.

    Order of 24 May 2024

  17. Filing
    Libya files declaration of intervention

    Libya became one of the early third states to seek to intervene under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute, invoking its status as a party to the Genocide Convention.

    Libya files a declaration of intervention in the proceedings under Article 63 of the Statute

  18. Order
    Court fixes deadlines for Memorial and Counter-Memorial

    The Court set October 28, 2024, for South Africa’s Memorial and July 28, 2025, for Israel’s Counter-Memorial.

    Order of 21 May 2026

  19. Other
    Court orders further measures over Gaza famine risk

    On South Africa’s renewed request, the Court reaffirmed its prior order and required Israel to ensure unimpeded provision of humanitarian aid amid famine conditions.

    The ICJ's Second Order on Provisional Measures in the South Africa v. Israel Case

  20. Filing
    Nicaragua files request to intervene under Article 63

    Nicaragua sought to join the case over the interpretation of the Genocide Convention. Many other states later filed their own requests or declarations.

    South Africa's genocide case against Israel

  21. Other
    Court indicates first provisional measures

    The Court found it plausible that Israel’s acts could violate Palestinians’ rights under the Genocide Convention and ordered Israel to prevent genocidal acts and preserve evidence, among other measures.

    Gaza: Israel must implement Provisional Measures ordered by the ICJ

  22. Hearing
    Court holds hearings on provisional measures request

    The ICJ held two days of public hearings at the Peace Palace on South Africa’s request for provisional measures.

    South Africa's genocide case against Israel

  23. Filing
    South Africa files application instituting proceedings

    South Africa lodged its application against Israel alleging violations of the Genocide Convention in Gaza and requested provisional measures.

    Order of 24 May 2024

Experimental AI forecast

How it is made

Will South Africa file its Reply on the merits by the November 22, 2027, deadline fixed by the International Court of Justice?

  • South Africa files Reply on schedule70%
  • Still pending on January 31, 202821%
  • Deadline extended, Reply filed late6%
  • South Africa discontinues the case3%
Resolves by
Jan 31, 2028in 16 months
Record confidence
Medium

South Africa will most likely file its Reply by the November 22, 2027, deadline (70%). It met its Memorial deadline on time, has a strong interest in speed, and received an 18-month period to respond. A merits judgment is not expected before the 36-month horizon, so the Reply is the next decisive step.

How it resolves. Resolved from ICJ press releases and orders in General List No. 192. “On schedule” if the Court confirms South Africa filed its Reply on or before November 22, 2027. “Late filing” if the deadline is extended and the Reply is filed after November 22, 2027, but by January 31, 2028. “Discontinued” if South Africa discontinues the case before filing its Reply. “Still pending” if no Reply has been filed by January 31, 2028, for any other reason, including a longer extension or a suspension of proceedings.

Reasoning

Starting point. ICJ contentious cases in which the applicant faces a court-fixed deadline for a Reply: Roughly 70% to 75% of ICJ Replies are filed by the original deadline. The rest follow extensions, often on joint or unopposed requests.

The written phase runs to May 22, 2029, so hearings and a merits judgment fall outside a 36-month window. The next checkable step is South Africa’s Reply, due November 22, 2027. Most ICJ Replies arrive on time, roughly 70% to 75%, and South Africa filed its Memorial by the original October 28, 2024, deadline. As applicant, it has the strongest incentive to keep the case moving, and the 18-month period is generous. Against that, Israel’s Counter-Memorial is likely voluminous, and the earlier dispute over hyperlinked evidence produced a lengthy extension for Israel. A similar evidentiary issue, or the need to address the many Article 63 declarations, could prompt South Africa to seek more time. That is the leading alternative, and most extensions would push filing past January 31, 2028. Discontinuance is a long shot given South Africa’s sustained political commitment, though a change in its government’s priorities cannot be excluded.

South Africa filed its Memorial on the original deadline · Applicant’s political interest in a timely merits hearing · Volume of Israel’s Counter-Memorial and evidentiary disputes · Possible Court handling of many Article 63 declarations · Generous 18-month period already granted for the Reply

Generated automatically by Claude Opus 5.5 on Sep 26, 2026 from this case’s record on this site, and published without editorial review. The probabilities are the model’s judgment, not measured frequencies, and they are scored publicly as cases resolve. Not legal or investment advice. How the forecasts are made