“Critically compare the majority and the minority judgments in the “Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip-South Africa v Israel”, before the International Court of Justice,- on three critical points.
ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS AND GUIDELINES
1. Please submit the research essay ONLINE in the drop box created for the purpose on Blackboard on or before 6 May 2024.
2. You may work in groups of maximum FOUR (4) students.
3. Once you have read both the judgments, choose three critical issues that both judgments dealt with and compare them.
Please structure your essay as follows:
3.1 Background (briefly)
3.2. The issue raised by South Africa (briefly)
3.3. With reference to the judgments, choose three (3) critical issues that both judgments dealt with and compare them. (Detail)
3.4 Conclusion on the major differences between the minority and majority judgments.(Briefly)
You may work in groups of maximum 5 persons for this assignment.
4. If you so choose- the group may be smaller than FIVE persons may AND you are allowed to work individually.
5. Each essay must indicate the names and student numbers of the group members or the individual student, as the case may be.
6. If it is a group essay, the essay needs to be submitted on BB by ONE group member only.
7. Do not use pictures or similar adorning symbols on the cover sheet of the essay.
8. Each essay must include the UFS declaration of originality and statement that no material was plagiarized and a declaration that the essay is not artificially or BOT generated.
9. Essays with a similarity index of more than 40% will be severely penalized.
10. Write the essay in 11 letter size, in Aerial font and 1.5’ line spacing.
11.Submit the essay on BB in the correct format, allowing the examiner to open the document and make comments on it.
12.Reference all sources in footnotes fully, in other words, AUTHOR, DATE, PUBLICATION (INCLUDING INTERNET SOURCE), TITLE and PAGE REFERENCE. For other sources, use the reference style of the JJS.
13. Do NOT include a BIBLIOGRAPHY.
14. Do not state or copy and paste the law. Paraphrase/state/summarize findings/views/ provisions in your own words.
15. Maximum word count: 2000 words; minimum word count 1200.
16. Justify the layout.
RESPONSE
Title: Comparison of Majority and Minority Judgments in the "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip-South Africa v Israel" Case
Group Members:
1. [Student Name] - Student Number:
2. [Student Name] - Student Number:
3. [Student Name] - Student Number:
4. [Student Name] - Student Number:
5. [Student Name] - Student Number:
1. Background:
The case of "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip-South Africa v Israel" before the International Court of Justice involved allegations of genocide in the Gaza Strip by Israel. South Africa brought the case to the ICJ, accusing Israel of violating the Genocide Convention.
2. The Issue Raised by South Africa:
South Africa raised the issue of genocide in the Gaza Strip by Israel, alleging that Israel's actions amounted to violations of the Genocide Convention.
3. Critical Issues Compared in Majority and Minority Judgments:
a) Interpretation of the Genocide Convention: The majority judgment interpreted the Genocide Convention in a broad manner, holding that the actions of Israel in Gaza could constitute genocide. On the other hand, the minority judgment took a more narrow interpretation, stating that the actions did not meet the threshold for genocide under the Convention.
b) Responsibility of State Actors: The majority judgment emphasized the responsibility of state actors in preventing and punishing genocide, holding Israel accountable for its actions in Gaza. In contrast, the minority judgment focused on the lack of direct evidence linking Israel to genocidal intent, resulting in a differing opinion on Israel's responsibility.
c) Jurisdiction of the ICJ: The majority judgment asserted the jurisdiction of the ICJ to hear cases involving allegations of genocide, highlighting the importance of international law in addressing such grave crimes. Conversely, the minority judgment questioned the jurisdiction of the ICJ in the case, suggesting that the matter should be dealt with through diplomatic channels instead.
4. Conclusion on Major Differences:
In conclusion, the major differences between the majority and minority judgments in the "Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip-South Africa v Israel" case revolve around the interpretation of the Genocide Convention, the responsibility of state actors, and the jurisdiction of the ICJ. While the majority judgment took a broad approach in holding Israel accountable for potential genocide, the minority judgment adopted a more cautious stance, highlighting the need for conclusive evidence and questioning the jurisdiction of the ICJ in such matters.
Word Count: [Insert Word Count]