Guardian is AGAIN forced to correct false claim on ICJ ruling

As we wrote in a post last week, a Guardian article by their Beirut correspondent William Christou (“US imposes sanctions on Palestinians for requesting war crimes inquiry“, 5 Sept) included the following erroneous claim:

In an interim judgment in January 2024, the ICJ ruled that the claim of genocide was “plausible”…

As we’ve noted in communications with the outlet’s Readers’ Editor previously, which resulted in two corrections, the former president of the ICJ, Joan Donoghue, made it clear that the court did NOT, in fact, rule that it was “plausible” that “genocide” was taking place in Gaza.

During an interview on BBC’s Hardtalk in April 2024, Donoghue clarified that, contrary to numerous media claims, the court narrowly decided the Palestinians’ “rights” to be protected from genocide were “plausible” and that South Africa had the right to present that claim in the court. The ICJ did NOT rule on the merits of the accusation itself.

Here are the relevant sections from the court’s ruling:

In the Court’s view, the facts and circumstances mentioned above
are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South
Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible

…

The Court reaffirms that the decision given in the present proceedings in no way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal with the merits of the case or any questions relating to the admissibility of the Application or to the merits themselves

The Guardian upheld our complaint and amended the relevant sentence, which now reads as follows:

In an interim judgment in January 2024, the ICJ ruled that Palestinians’ right to be protected from genocide was at “imminent risk”…

Editors also added the following addendum, noting the correction.

In our post last week, we also noted that The National and The Times made variations of the same error. To date, neither outlet has corrected their articles.