In a highly anticipated decision, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to deliver its ruling on Friday regarding the provisional measures requested by South Africa in its genocide case against Israel. The court's ruling will not determine whether Israel is guilty of committing genocide in its war on the Gaza Strip, but instead, it will focus on the nine provisional measures sought by South Africa in its case.

One of the key measures requested by South Africa is an immediate suspension of military operations "in and against" the Gaza Strip. Additionally, South Africa has called upon Israel to refrain from obstructing the delivery of humanitarian aid into the Palestinian enclave. However, it remains uncertain as to whether the ICJ will agree to all, some, or none of the requested measures based on the strength of the arguments presented.

Legal scholars have acknowledged the strength of South Africa's case, although a complete cessation of hostilities is unlikely to be mandated by the court. The case mainly revolves around the creation of conditions that are incompatible with life, such as the lack of food and water, rather than solely focusing on the military campaign.

It is important to note that the ICJ has jurisdiction over states and can issue orders to Israel but not to Hamas, a non-state entity. Israel's main argument is self-defense against Hamas, highlighting the complexity of the situation. With limited evidence available at the preliminary hearing, the court may strive to strike a balance between protecting civilians and not impeding Israel's actions against Hamas.

While ICJ rulings are legally binding, the court lacks the means to enforce them. However, non-compliance can be noted and may result in future orders for compensation. In the short term, states can request the involvement of the UN Security Council, which can impose separate sanctions to enforce compliance with ICJ rulings. Nevertheless, the risk remains of the United States vetoing any Security Council decisions aimed at enforcing the court's orders.

It is anticipated that Israel may refuse to comply with a ruling calling for a complete ceasefire, but there may be potential for agreement regarding the facilitation of humanitarian aid into Gaza. A favorable ruling on some or all of South Africa's provisional measures, even if unenforced, could exert pressure on Israel and its allies.

South Africa's case establishes a plausible risk of genocide, but it does not confirm its occurrence. However, a ruling in favor of South Africa could have wider implications, compelling other states to reconsider their support for Israel and take the prevention of genocide more seriously.

The ICJ's decision holds significant ramifications, with potential repercussions for diplomatic relations and future actions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.