At this stage, the ICJ was not considering whether Israel is actually committing genocide in Gaza – that process will take several years.

But the court warned Israel to “take all measures in its power to prevent” acts that could fall under the UN Genocide Convention, set up in 1948 as the world reeled from the horrors of the Nazi Holocaust.

Malaysia backs South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel’s ‘genocidal’ acts in Gaza

It also said Israel should “prevent and punish” any incitement to genocide.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel was committed to international law, but he reiterated that it had a right to defend itself.

Netanhayu said the charge of genocide was “outrageous”.

“Like every country, Israel has a basic right to defend itself,” he said in a statement released in Hebrew.

“The World Court in The Hague justly rejected the outrageous demand to deprive us of this right,” he said, seemingly referring to the fact that the court stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire.

“But the mere claim that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians is not only false, it’s outrageous, and the willingness of the court to even discuss this is a disgrace that will not be erased for generations.”

Netanyahu had already suggested he does not feel bound by the court, saying: “no one will stop us – not The Hague, not the Axis of Evil and no one else”.

The case was brought by South Africa, which has accused Israel of breaching the UN Genocide Convention.

President Cyril Ramaphosa and the ruling council of South Africa’s ruling party erupted in cheers, singing and dancing on Friday after the court ordered Israel to prevent possible genocide in Gaza.

The African National Congress National Executive Committee suspended a meeting to watch a broadcast from the court in The Hague, and live footage from the event showed senior party and government figures celebrating.

“Today marks a decisive victory for the international rule of law and a significant milestone in the search for justice for the Palestinian people,” the foreign ministry said.

“South Africa sincerely hopes that Israel will not act to frustrate the application of this Order, as it has publicly threatened to do, but that it will instead act to comply with it fully, as it is bound to do.”

It said South Africa would continue to act within the institutions of global governance to protect the rights of Palestinians in Gaza.

The ICJ decision is an important development that contributes to isolating Israel and exposing its crimes in Gaza, senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters on Friday.

“We call for forcing the occupation to implement the court’s decisions,” he added

Over two days of hearings earlier this month in the gilded hall of the Peace Palace, where the ICJ sits, lawyers from both sides battled it over the interpretation of this Convention.

South Africa accused Israel of “genocidal” acts that were intended to cause the “destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group.”

It urged the court to order Israel to “immediately suspend” its military operations in Gaza and allow humanitarian aid to reach the civilians there.

Israel dismissed the case as a “grossly distorted story” and said that if any genocidal acts had been carried out, they had been executed against Israel during the October 7 Hamas attacks.

“What Israel seeks by operating in Gaza is not to destroy a people, but to protect a people, its people, who are under attack on multiple fronts,” said Tal Becker, Israel’s top lawyer.

The question now is whether the court’s rulings will be obeyed.

Although its rulings are legally binding, it has no mechanism to enforce them, and they are sometimes completely ignored – it has ordered Russia to stop its invasion of Ukraine, for example.

Why the South African genocide case against Israel really matters

But experts believe that aside from the significant symbolic impact of the ruling, there could be tangible consequences on the ground.

“It makes it much harder for other states to continue to support Israel in the face of a neutral third party finding there is a risk of genocide,” said Juliette McIntyre, international law expert from the University of South Australia.

“States may withdraw military or other support for Israel in order to avoid this,” she added.

Reed Brody, a human rights lawyer, believes the ruling will put pressure on Israel.

“The ICJ didn’t give South Africa all it wanted, but this ruling is a resounding vindication of Pretoria’s decision to bring the case, and a powerful indictment of Israeli policy,” Brody said.

“Most importantly, whatever the Israeli government may say, this binding order will put pressure on Israel, directly and through its allies, to end the collective punishment of the people of Gaza and to allow humanitarian aid …

“Finally, after almost four months of death and destruction, Israel has faced a legal reckoning for its actions,” he added

What is the genocide case against Israel at top UN court?

The October 7 Hamas attack resulted in the death of around 1,140 people in Israel, most of them civilians, according to Israeli figures.

At least 26,083 Palestinians, around 70 per cent of them women, young children and adolescents, have been killed in the Gaza Strip in Israeli bombardments and ground offensive since then, according to the Hamas government’s health ministry.

Meanwhile, Palestine welcomed the provisional measures, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki said in a televised speech on Friday.

“The ICJ judges assessed the facts and the law, they ruled in favour of humanity and international law,” he said.

Al-Maliki added that Palestine calls on all states to ensure the measures ordered by the court are implemented, “including by Israel, the occupying power.”