In the current South African lawsuit against Israel.
1,000
3.00@nathanwei I would suspect an upward trend given that more international bodies would be able to enter soon hopefully and will start auditing the situation, given that they were blocked beforehand.
Not sure which way this cuts - on the one hand it's yet more evidence of ICJ corruption/anti Israel connections, otoh I guess this means he's out?
@ShakedKoplewitz I don't understand the "icj corruption" angle?
On the other hand, "anti-israel", possible since he probably lived through Israel's past attacks on lebanon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_occupation_of_Southern_Lebanon
Might also be worth noting that the judge is not a fan of hezbollah they aren't necessarily fans of his either, but i'm not well read on that specifically.
It might be good for Israel given that the next person taking over his role in the ICJ is very pro-israel: https://x.com/DropSiteNews/status/1878924090926354609
@Ammar I think having the judge at Israel's trial also be a senior politician from a country whose de facto military is, while the trial is ongoing, bombing Israeli civilians, is a pretty damn huge conflict of interest (even if he's from the opposite party).
@ShakedKoplewitz calling hezbollah the de facto military of lebanon is a stretch even though they're likely bigger than lebanon's actual military, and it also comes off disingenuous in this conversation's context because it implies Judge Nawaf Salam has some authority over them.
If you were to get any of Lebanon's judges to replace Nawaf Salam in the ICJ, that wont change much. They're anti-israel bias, specially after the number of Lebanese civilians murdered by Israel in the last year, will exist throughout the entire country.
@Ammar Yes, obviously you shouldn't have any lebanese politician judging Israel while Lebanon is actively bombing Israel, how is this even a question. This would be like putting Japanese politicians in charge of a war crimes tribunal of american soldiers in the middle of WW2. Which party they're in or their exact control over it isn't super relevant. The court is being run by politicians from a hostile nation and is used as a tool to advance their war aims.
Also, seems disingenuous to say this is about "lebanese civilians murdered by Israel". Lebanon started an unprovoked war with Israel by shooting tens of thousands of missiles at israeli civilian targets, and Israel was both remarkably restrained in its response all things considered.
@Ammar The Lebanese juge holds a "Western European and others" seat so it's likely that a European judge will get the seat instead.
@ShakedKoplewitz I didn't say it's "about lebanese civilians murdered by Israel", I said all Lebanese judges will have an "anti-israel bias, specially after the number of Lebanese civilians murdered by Israel in the last year". Why else do you think these judges might have an anti-israel bias?
Also, are you intentionally conflating Hezbollah with all of Lebanon? Do you also conflating the actions of Hilltop Youth, Lehava, and Amana as all of Israel? That would be anti-semitic.
@ShakedKoplewitz @Ammar Oh no what is this thread? Salam is anti Hezbollah but is also unfriendly to Israel. In general you expect justices from the Arab world to be more unfriendly to Israel.
Seem really interesting the difference between manifold's 21% prediction and metaculus' 69%. I know metaculus isn't a prediction 'market' but I still wouldn't expect this big a difference between the two. https://www.metaculus.com/questions/31071/israel-found-guilty-in-sas-icj-genocide-case-before-2027/
@Ammar Metaculus is notably more calibrated than manifold, so this should update you more in one direction than the other.
@GarrettBaker Metaculus has 19 forecasters for that market, compared to 225 holders here. The legal arguments for the "genocide" case by HRW, Amnesty, Ireland etc require changing the definition of genocide. There is a clear majority of Western-aligned judges. Out of the 15 judges, you have 9 from: Uganda (pro Israel judge), Slovakia, France, India, Japan, Germany, Australia, USA, Romania. India and France retire in 2027. France always has a seat so that will be another French, thus securing still 8/15 even if the India seat goes to an anti-Israel country. The Lebanese judge also retires in 2027 but he is in a seat that the British generally have, so the British are likely to get it back, securing 9/15.
Not clear how Brazil and Mexico will vote. But I really doubt the justices from any of the countries I mentioned will vote to change the definition of genocide to convict Israel.
@nathanwei I guess the Metaculus is about a verdict BEFORE 2027. So which judges' terms end in 2027 is irrelevant. There might not even be a verdict by EOY 2026.
@nathanwei On average metaculus gets less forecasters than manifold. The link Garrett Baker shared seems to show that even with that, they are still more calibrated.
Your reasoning seems to completely ignore that late last year the ICJ found Israel to be an apartheid state even with the "clear majority of Western-aligned judges": https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/19/world-court-findings-israeli-apartheid-wake-call
@Ammar No, they found Israel guilty of committing the "crime of apartheid" in the occupied Palestinian territory (not in Israel itself, where Arabs vote and where it does not have jurisdiction). Under modern international law, apartheid is a crime not an inherent property of states.
Genocide is a much higher bar. You need to show specific intent - dolus specialis - to eliminate a group of people. Remember in Serbia vs Croatia they ruled that Serbia was not committing genocide. HRW's case is for the ICJ to overturn its own precedent and change the definition of genocide to accuse Israel. There is no such legal quandary with the crime of apartheid.
The French judge Abraham historically didn't support the ICJ case against Israel in 2004, and said such matters should be negotiated, but I do think he voted for the "apartheid" charge. Everyone did except Uganda and Germany I think. Including the US judge. I really doubt the US judge will vote for genocide. Or the Japanese judge. Or any of them.
Remember also that ICJ also notably did not order Israel to stop the Rafah offensive in its preliminary ruling even though some observers expected that they might.
@GarrettBaker This is from a while ago. I suspect the gap has narrowed in recent years. There was a noticeable decline in the quality of the Metaculus user base.
@Ammar "Even with that" ... 19 vs 225? And I think Metaculus has gotten a lot worse since that post was made, and Manifold got better.
@Ammar Metaculus is asking something different, for any violation of international law:
“This question will resolve as Yes if, before January 1, 2027, the International Court of Justice finds that Israel has violated international law in South Africa's genocide case. If this does not happen before January 1, 2027, this question will resolve as No.”
We have a version of this question ion with war crimes instead of genocide that’s much higher.
@GarrettBaker Metaculus is not actually asking if Israel will be found guilty of genocide. Read res criteria.
@GarrettBaker Metaculus is not actually asking if Israel will be found guilty of genocide. Read res criteria.
@GarrettBaker That question is about "if Israel has violated international law in South Africa's genocide case". I'm not sure exactly what that means but you might not need genocide to resolve yes.
So, it's true that a consensus of these sorts of humanitarian NGOs has said that Israel is committing genocide, but all of them are asking the ICJ to broaden the definition of genocide.
Where is the dolus specialis? The proof that Israel has the special intent to destroy the Palestinian people?
How has the ICJ acted in the past? It didn't even order Israel to stop the Rafah offensive, even though these same NGOs wanted it. I think it's quite unlikely for the ICJ to rule that Israel is committing genocide. So yeah, I think this market is fairly priced.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ireland-to-formally-intervene-in-south-africas-genocide-case-against-israel-at-the-icj-after-government-approval/a1250142635.html
"By legally intervening in South Africa’s case, Ireland will be asking the ICJ to broaden its interpretation of what constitutes the commission of genocide by a State"
@AVS Seems Ireland wants to make sure Israel isn't trying to use a loophole technicality (similar to how some criminals get away with crimes in courts) to avoid the genocide label. Regardless if it happens or not, it's sad to see how some dehumanize themselves by struggling to acknowledge what's happening as horrible. Even if the definition change doesn't go through and the ICJ determines it is a genocide, those with such views will use their usual revisionist history to pretend the definition changed and Israel is the victim in all of this.
Based on Amensty International's video on why their organization is already labelling it a genocide, it makes it pretty clear that Israel is already likely to lose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8_18UuiAm4
@Ammar If that was intended as a response to me, I fully acknowledge that what's happening is horrible.
@Ammar "Some criminals use technicalities to get away with crimes in court" is a weird analogy when in this case the "technicality" is "not actually committing the crime".