Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

The Change at the Top of the International Criminal Court

By

Nawaf Salam, who had been the president of the International Court of Justice, has just accepted the post of Prime Minister of Lebanon. When Salam headed the ICJ, the Court agreed to consider South Africa’s charge that Israel was committing “genocide” in Gaza. But one judge — Julia Sebutinde of Uganda, who has been Vice President of the ICJ since February 2024 — robustly rejected South Africa’s claims. And now that Salam has left his ICJ post, Judge Sebutinde becomes the president of the ICJ for the next three years. That may well result in a more just treatment of Israel by the Court. More on Judge Julia Sebutinde can be found here: “Pro-Israel judge poised to take over ICJ presidency,” Jewish News Syndicate, January 14, 2025:

Judge Julia Sebutinde is set to assume the presidency of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), marking another milestone in her groundbreaking career as well as a significant shift for the court.

The Ugandan jurist, who recently made headlines for her robust defence of Israel against South Africa’s genocide allegations, will take the helm following current President Nawaf Salam’s departure.

Salam has been appointed Prime Minister of his native Lebanon by new president Joseph Aoun, whose election, backed by the US and Saudi Arabia, represents a major blow to Iran and its proxy Hezbollah.

Born Julia Semusso in February 1954 in Uganda’s Central Province to a civil servant father and homemaker mother, Sebutinde’s journey to The Hague reflects a remarkable career. Her ascent began with her 1996 appointment to Uganda’s Supreme Court, where she distinguished herself by leading three pivotal anti-corruption investigations in her homeland….

Sebutinde’s recent ruling on the Israel-Hamas War has particularly resonated in international legal circles. She dismissed South Africa’s requests for temporary injunctions to halt the Gaza war, asserting that the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people is fundamentally political rather than legal in both its nature and historical context, and therefore falls outside the court’s purview….

As president of the ICJ, Sebutinde will have a more powerful voice in the ICJ’s deliberations than she did before, and will no doubt lessen the anti-Israel atmospherics during the Court’s deliberations that the Court that Nawaf Salam did nothing to dissipate. She has powerfully defended Israel against the charge of “genocide” brought by South Africa to the court. She will be able to direct the ICJ’s proceedings, and to critically examine, as the judge who is primus inter pares, the South African claims that her predecessor Judge Salam was so ready to accept.

In 2024, the ICJ ordered Israel “to take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of the Genocide Convention, and to take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” Israel — which is not subject to the Court’s jurisdiction, but has replied in public to the ICJ’s finding — notes that it has provided for the delivery of humanitarian aid (1.1 million tons of it) to people in Gaza, and that it has not committed “genocide,” but makes tremendous efforts to warn civilians to leave areas and buildings about to be targeted, and that it is Hamas that, by deliberately embedding its men and weapons in civilian areas, that tries to maximize civilian casualties.

A Daniel come to judgment in The Hague? Could be. Judge Julia Sebutinde has quite a track record of giving Israel a fair shake, something that happens so rarely in international organizations these days. Let’s see what happens now with the ICJ’s previous ruling on South Africa’s charge against Israel. Might the ICJ, under new and most welcome management, revisit that ruling?

Comments

  1. We need more intelligent and rational people like Judge Julia Sebutinde. If we had more people like her this world would be a better place.

  2. Why are we allowing South Africa, Lebanon, and Uganda to decide international law?

    The UN must be dismantled

    • Yeah, the entire idea that all countries have an equal say in the decisions of the UN, while apparently fair, is ridiculous. It puts the US vote at par w/ countries like Somalia, Yemen, Congo, Bolivia, Brunei, Bangladesh, et al. A better idea would be to weight all countries as per various metrics – GDP, population, military power, etc and then have their votes up there. So that the Israeli vote would be worth much more than that of Somalia

      I’d love to see the UN dismantled, but since that’s not gonna happen, the next best thing would be what I suggest above

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content