Mann, Itamar Author aut Text xx# 2024 Verfassungsblog 2024-01-15 eng

electronic resource

remote

Computermedien

Online-Ressource

In its application to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), South Africa seeks a ceasefire as a provisional measure. However, after the oral arguments, it seems rather unlikely that the entire scope of the provisional measures will be granted. This post seeks to offer some preliminary reflections on what a “softer” provisional measure would mean for the law and politics of the “genocide” category. Initially, such measures would slightly complicate predictions on whether and how Israel will comply, and how it will manage ramifications for its reputation. More importantly, I suggest that such provisional measures would almost inevitably position the Court, for the duration of the proceedings, in a position of quasi-bureaucratic governance. I call this counter-genocidal governance. As shown in other national security contexts, such judicial governance is a double-edged sword. While moderating certain aspects of state violence, it may legitimate others. CC BY-SA 4.0 Mann, Itamar Genocide ICJ Israel-Gaza War Israel-Hamas War Statute of the International Court of Justice | Vereinte Nationen Völkermord Statute of the International Court of Justice | Vereinte Nationen Völkermord 342 https://verfassungsblog.de/managed-violence/ 2366-7044 Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH 10.59704/2c92943131b316c1 240115 10.59704/2c92943131b316c1 Converted from MARCXML to MODS version 3.7 using MARC21slim2MODS3-7.xsl (Revision 1.140 20200717)