The Gambia v. Myanmar case will be decided by 16 ICJ judges (15 elected ones - 1 as Judge Okowa has recused herself due to her past involvement in the case +2 ad hoc judges). A judgment - which cannot modify the definition of genocide but can only interpret and apply it, following the rules of treaty interpretation - will have to be supported by at least 8 of them (in which case including casting vote of the President). Moreover, as you are undoubtedly also aware, ICJ judges must fulfill the criteria of being independent, "persons of high moral character", with necessary legal qualifications, and "of recognized competence in international law" (Art. 2 ICJ Statute). It thus takes quite a conspiracy theorist to argue, as you do, that Judge "Pillay and her supporters are poised to hijack the Myanmar case to drastically reinterpret the genocide standard so as to retroactively justify her claim that Israel committed genocide" and think that, in that conspiracy scenario, they could so succeed. To suggest that at least 8 (including the President) or 9 ICJ judges or would adopt a judgment based on ulterior motives is just wild. Any of the judges who share Judge Pillay's - a renowned and respected expert - position(s) regarding the interpretation of the Convention's defintion and its application, whichever specific positions those may be, must have adopted those based on substantive legal considerations.