ICC refuses to withdraw Netanyahu arrest warrant

The International Criminal Court rejects Israel’s petition to revoke arrest warrants for two Israeli leaders, upholding ruling claiming the ICC has jurisdiction over the Jewish state.

By World Israel News Staff

The International Criminal Court has refused Israel’s request to overturn a decision made in the ICC probe of Israel’s conduct during the war against Hamas in Gaza, upholding arrest warrants issued for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

On Monday, the ICC’s appellate chamber handed down a ruling in response to Israel’s petition calling for a lower court’s decision to be thrown out, which enabled ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan to issue the warrants.

Last year, ICC judges ruled that the court has jurisdiction over Israel, despite the fact that the Jewish state is not a party to the Rome Statute, which established the court.

ICC appellate judges upheld the decision in a split vote, with three judges ruling against Israel’s petition and two voting in favor of withdrawing the warrants.

In its ruling, the appellate chamber backed the argument that the ICC has secondary jurisdiction over Israel via the principle of complementarity, under Article 12 of the Rome Statute.

Since 2021, the ICC has treated Judea, Samaria, Gaza, and eastern Jerusalem as the territory of a member state, after recognizing unilateral Palestinian statehood in 2015, thus enabling the ICC to invoke Article 12.

Israel castigated the ICC ruling, accusing the court of a “blatant disregard” for national sovereignty.

“Israel rejects the ICC Appeals Chamber’s decision, by a narrow majority, to deny Israel’s right to receive advance notice, as demanded by the principle of complementarity particularly with regard to a democratic state with an independent and robust judicial system,” said Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Oren Marmorstein.

“This is yet another example of the ongoing politicization of the ICC and its blatant disregard for the sovereign rights of non-party states, as well as its own obligations under the Rome Statute. This is what politics in the guise of ‘international law’ looks like.”