Belgium Files Declaration of Intervention at ICJ
Brussels, Belgium – On December 23, 2025, Belgium formally submitted a declaration of intervention to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, concerning the case brought by South Africa against Israel. The case alleges violations of the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip. Belgium's intervention, made under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute, signals its intent to contribute to the interpretation of international law relevant to the proceedings.
Article 63 of the Statute grants states that are parties to a convention under interpretation the right to intervene in proceedings, with the Court's judgment on the construction of the convention becoming equally binding upon them.
Focus on Defining 'Specific Intent'
Belgium's declaration specifically focuses on Articles I through VI of the Genocide Convention, with particular attention to Article II. This article pertains to the crucial element of 'specific intent' (or dolus specialis) required to prove genocidal acts. The Belgian government has stated that its participation is not an endorsement of either South Africa's accusations or Israel's defense, but rather an effort to clarify its interpretation of international law.
In its submission, Belgium put forth several key arguments regarding the interpretation of genocidal intent:
- The existence of an armed conflict does not preclude a finding of genocidal intent.
- The pursuit of military objectives does not automatically eliminate genocidal intent.
- War operations can coincide with genocidal intent if they are disproportionate to achieve valid military reasons.
- Claims of abiding by international humanitarian law do not serve as a defense against the crime of genocide, but can assist the court in determining whether genocidal intent existed.
Context of South Africa's Case and International Response
South Africa initiated its case against Israel on December 29, 2023, accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel has consistently rejected these allegations, characterizing them as 'baseless' and asserting that its military operations are conducted in self-defense following the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas, and in accordance with international law.
The ICJ has previously issued provisional measures in January, March, and May 2024, ordering Israel to take all possible steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza and to ensure the provision of urgently needed humanitarian aid. While these orders are legally binding, the Court lacks direct mechanisms for their enforcement.
Belgium joins a growing list of nations that have either intervened or expressed their intention to intervene in the case, including Brazil, Colombia, Ireland, Mexico, Spain, and Turkey, reflecting broader international engagement with the legal proceedings.
5 Comments
Africa
Defining specific intent is a nuanced legal task that can strengthen the Genocide Convention, but proving it in the context of an active conflict is incredibly difficult. The court faces a huge evidentiary hurdle.
Coccinella
Belgium's effort to define 'intent' is important for future cases, but we must also acknowledge the immediate humanitarian crisis on the ground. Legal definitions don't alleviate suffering directly.
Habibi
This intervention will only inflame tensions further. Not helpful at all.
Muchacha
More political posturing masking as legal intervention. What a waste of time.
Bella Ciao
Finally, a nation stepping up for legal clarity and human rights at the ICJ.