The Chair of this "independent" inquiry is Navi Pillay of South Africa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_International_Comm...); the nation which accused Israel of genocide and referred it to the ICJ. The outcome of this inquiry was always going to be highly partisan. The report's definition rests upon statements by key Israeli officials in determining genocidal intent. While the statements are accurate, in a democracy, individual representatives do not constitute a single will. If the standard used here were applied to other international conflicts in which civilians were killed, as long as just one governing official were to have made genocidal remarks (and they used a fairly wide range), the entire conflict could be ruled to be genocide. Thus the standard used by Pillay and co-authors is so far removed from anything applied to any other nation and conflict that I find the entire exercise farcical.
I await the ICJ ruling, as I regard that institution as reasonably impartial.