Al Jazeera backtracks on ICJ genocide ruling in Gaza case report

Al Jazeera has clarified its description of a key International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling, correcting language that overstated the court’s findings in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel.

In its October 17 article, Will Gaza ceasefire change South Africa’s ICJ genocide case against Israel?, the outlet originally reported that the ICJ had found it “plausible” that Israel was violating the Genocide Convention. The correction now makes clear that the court’s January 2024 ruling did not determine that Israel was plausibly committing genocide. Rather, it found that Palestinians have a plausible right to protection under the Convention — a procedural threshold allowing the case to proceed, not a judgment on Israel’s guilt.

The misstatement, though subtle, carried major implications. The ICJ’s January ruling was an interim measure, not a final decision on the merits. Its language of “plausibility” referred to the rights of the Palestinian people and the court’s jurisdiction, not to any finding that Israel was committing genocide. By framing the court’s conclusion as an acknowledgment of Israel’s “plausible” violation, the original report blurred the line between allegation and adjudication — an error that risks distorting public understanding of the case’s legal standing and of how the ICJ operates.

Al Jazeera’s updated version now reflects the distinction, aligning with the precise wording of the court’s decision and ensuring its coverage adheres to the legal nuances central to international law reporting.