South Africa’s Justice Minister linked Israel to domestic unrest and the ICJ case. Her own newspaper source recorded the missing part: evidence.

Disclosure: I advise the Mthwakazi Republic Party, Office of the President, on recognition doctrine and sovereignty. I cite the Party’s public documents below because Pretoria’s treatment of that claim is part of the same evidentiary problem.

On July 5, the Sunday Times interviewed Justice Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi about the June 30 anti-immigration marches. Kubayi did not expressly accuse Israel of organizing them. She suggested an Israeli connection, gave South Africa’s genocide case at the International Court of Justice as the motive, and said it would be naive to assume powerful interests would not fight back. Then the newspaper stated what the minister had not: she presented no evidence that Israel, or any other foreign state, was involved.[1]

The interview also described a serious security operation. Intelligence services were monitoring the marches. Drones and live CCTV feeds were in use. Ministers, police and intelligence officials were coordinating continuously because the government feared a repeat of the July 2021 unrest. That proves Pretoria was worried. It does not prove who stood behind the marches. On foreign involvement, Kubayi said she could not discuss the matter publicly and would remain generic. A classified file may exist. The public was not shown one.

The distinction is not pedantry. A justice minister can reasonably refuse to disclose operational intelligence. She cannot use secrecy to turn an untested suspicion into a public accusation and then ask everyone else to supply the missing proof themselves. The burden remains with the government that introduced Israel into the story.

Kubayi’s department had already written the rule

Three months earlier, the Justice Ministry had taken a much harder line when allegations were made about Kubayi herself. In a March 27 statement, the department accused lawyers of acting unethically and unprofessionally because they had failed to ascertain the veracity of their allegations before circulating them. That was a sound principle. Public accusation is not a substitute for verification, and public office is no excuse for lowering the standard.[2]

The problem is not that Kubayi suspected foreign involvement. Governments investigate foreign interference all the time. The problem is the sequence. She publicly connected Israel to unrest, supplied a geopolitical motive tied directly to Pretoria’s ICJ litigation, and offered no public evidence. Her own department had just condemned others for doing the same kind of thing to her.

The Hague is supposed to be different

South Africa chose a........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)