Janice R. Andrews
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former defense minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas leader Ibrahim al-Masri. These charges, which allege war crimes and crimes against humanity, mark a significant moment in international justice and have sparked widespread global debate. The move also raises questions about the legal and political ramifications for those implicated and Israel’s longstanding rejection of ICC jurisdiction.
Charges Against Netanyahu and Gallant
The ICC alleges that Netanyahu and Gallant bear “criminal responsibility” for war crimes, including using starvation as a method of warfare and crimes against humanity such as murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts. These accusations stem from the Israeli military’s actions in Gaza, which have drawn severe criticism for their humanitarian impact.
Despite Israel’s repeated challenges to the ICC’s jurisdiction, the court has asserted its authority. It reasoned that since the Palestinian territories are ICC signatories, the court has the right to investigate alleged crimes committed there, regardless of Israel’s non-membership in the Rome Statute.
Hamas Leader Indicted as Well
The ICC also named Hamas military leader Ibrahim al-Masri, also known as Mohammed Deif, in its arrest warrants. Al-Masri is accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including murder, torture, sexual violence, and hostage-taking, in connection with Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel. These attacks reportedly killed over 1,200 people and saw more than 240 individuals abducted.
While Israel claims to have killed al-Masri, Hamas has neither confirmed nor denied his death. The ICC had previously withdrawn arrest warrants for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar and Ismael Haniyeh after their deaths were confirmed by Israeli forces.
ICC’s Jurisdiction and Challenges
The ICC has specific jurisdictional rules, targeting individuals accused of core international crimes such as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and waging wars of aggression. It intervenes only when national legal systems fail to prosecute such crimes.
Although Israel does not recognize the ICC, its jurisdiction extends to crimes committed in the Palestinian territories, which are Rome Statute signatories. This jurisdictional stance has enabled investigations into alleged war crimes by both Israeli forces and Hamas. However, enforcing ICC warrants is complex, as nations like the U.S., China, Russia, and most Arab states, including Israel, reject its authority.
The ICC relies on its 124 member states to enforce warrants. These members are legally obligated to arrest indicted individuals within their territories, limiting travel options for those facing charges.
What the Warrant Means for Netanyahu
An ICC warrant does not equal a conviction but indicates the seriousness of the allegations. The court issues such warrants to ensure that the accused appear for trial, do not obstruct investigations, or refrain from committing further crimes.
Despite the warrant, it is unlikely Netanyahu or Gallant will appear before the ICC, as the court lacks its own enforcement mechanism. However, the warrant significantly restricts their international mobility, as seen with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has avoided many global meetings since an ICC warrant was issued against him for alleged war crimes in Ukraine.
Domestically, the warrant may weaken Netanyahu’s political standing, providing ammunition for critics to question his leadership. Yet, the chances of Israeli courts prosecuting a sitting prime minister remain slim, particularly amid ongoing conflict.
Broader Implications for Israel
The ICC’s move is part of a larger investigation into alleged war crimes by both Israeli forces and Hamas. Since the escalation of violence in October 2023, the conflict has resulted in immense human suffering. Gaza’s Health Ministry estimates that Israeli military operations have claimed over 44,000 lives, though these figures are unverified. A Lancet report suggested that the death toll could be as high as 186,000.
Criticism of Israel’s actions has also reached other international bodies. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is separately examining accusations of genocide against Israel. The ICJ has issued provisional measures urging Israel to halt military operations in southern Gaza and facilitate humanitarian aid, although it has not demanded a full cessation of hostilities. Unlike the ICC, the ICJ handles disputes between states rather than prosecuting individuals.
ICC’s Pursuit of Hamas
The ICC’s actions against Hamas leaders reflect its efforts to investigate crimes on both sides of the conflict. By addressing accusations against Israeli and Palestinian actors, the court aims to demonstrate impartiality. However, its ability to enforce justice in politically sensitive conflicts remains a challenge.
What Lies Ahead?
The ICC’s decision marks a pivotal moment in the global pursuit of accountability for war crimes. For Netanyahu, the warrant casts a shadow over his political career, limiting his international engagement and opening avenues for criticism at home and abroad.
For the international community, the warrants represent a renewed commitment to addressing alleged war crimes, even in highly contentious conflicts. While immediate arrests are unlikely, the ICC’s actions send a strong signal about its dedication to upholding international law.
As investigations continue, this case could set a precedent for holding global leaders accountable, shaping the trajectory of international justice in the years to come. For now, Netanyahu, Gallant, and al-Masri must navigate the legal and political repercussions of the ICC’s unprecedented move.
