The International Court of Justice (ICJ) conducted hearings on Friday to hear Israel's defense against South Africa's accusations of committing acts of genocide in Gaza. The second day of these live-streamed hearings showcased the arguments presented by both sides in the highly contentious case.

According to South Africa, Israel has violated the 1948 Genocide Convention with its military actions in Gaza. In response, Israel's legal team, led by British lawyer Malcolm Shaw KC, argued that South Africa's claims distorted the military actions and devalued the significance of the crime of genocide. They emphasized Israel's right to self-defense under international law, citing Hamas's attack on Israeli outposts and villages as the catalyst for the conflict.

However, human rights organizations, including Neil Sammonds from War on Want, criticized Israel's arguments, stating that as an occupying force, Israel cannot claim self-defense. The ICJ had previously ruled in 2003 that an occupying power cannot assert the right to self-defense. The status of Gaza as an occupied territory under international law is a subject of debate.

Israel's legal team also disputed South Africa's accusations of intentional destruction of the Palestinian people. They claimed that quotes from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referring to "Amalek" were taken out of context. However, critics argue that Netanyahu's statements were not followed by assurances of avoiding civilian casualties.

Israel's lawyers contended that any allegations of war crimes would be addressed by Israel's legal system. Nevertheless, human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch, have raised concerns about the efficacy and fairness of Israel's legal system in holding its forces accountable for excessive use of force.

Regarding the alleged blockade of essential supplies in Gaza, Israel's representative stated that reports of blockades were inaccurate, emphasizing the allowance of food aid to the strip. However, critics highlighted that the blockade on Gaza has persisted for 16 years and has been considered collective punishment before the recent conflict.

The ICJ has yet to announce its decision. Experts predict that the court faces a challenging task as it considers jurisdictional and procedural arguments while also evaluating the humanitarian situation in Gaza. The court's ruling, which could come in the following weeks, will have significant implications for both countries involved.

This ongoing case at the ICJ highlights the intensifying international scrutiny surrounding the conflict in Gaza and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As the world awaits the court's decision, the outcome will undoubtedly shape future discussions surrounding accountability and justice in the region.