This was requested by the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court court judges edition arrest warrants for the leaders of Israel and Hamasresulting from the Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians on October 7, 2023 and the following Israeli siege of Gaza.
Karim AA Khan, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, often called the ICC, – wrote within the statement that he sought arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, in addition to Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Muhammad Deif and Ismail Haniyeh. Khan said each Israeli and Hamas leaders “bear criminal responsibility” for “war crimes and crimes against humanity,” which he detailed within the statement.
ICC allegations against Hamas include extermination, murder, hostage-taking, rape and other acts of sexual violence. The ICC’s charges against the 2 Israeli leaders include ravenous Palestinians in Gaza, “deliberately targeting civilians,” in addition to persecution and “deliberate killing.”
The ICC, an independent tribunal based in The Hague, Netherlands, prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes – the latter legal term which incorporates attacks on civilians and other crimes. violations of martial lawSuch as blocking humanitarian aid.
Khan announced an inquiry in November 2023 to investigate Hamas and Israeli suspects following the Hamas attack in Israel that killed 1,200 people and kidnapped lots of more, and Israel’s subsequent war in Gaza, which has to date over 34,000 Palestinians died.
ICC criminal investigation appears right after the famous genocide case which South Africa brought against Israel in December 2023 before one other international tribunal called the International Court of Justice.
But these investigations and courts are different. Although the ICC can conduct trials of individuals allegedly responsible for criminal violations of international humanitarian law, the International Court of Justice is the a part of the United Nations that adjudicates civil and civil disputes. cannot accuse individuals of crimes.
How human rights researcher and international courts, I imagine it’s important to emphasize that the ICC and other contemporary international criminal tribunals would not have enforcement powers of their very own. This signifies that in an Israel-Hamas situation, the ICC may never have the option to arrest the suspects or bring them to justice.
Therefore, these international courts have had mixed experiences in holding senior political and military leaders accountable for their crimes. Only when political leaders lose power is there a probability that their governments will arrest them and hand them over to international courts for prosecution.
AFP via Getty Images
A challenge for international courts
Take the instance of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has been opposing an ICC arrest warrant since March 2023 for allegedly committing war crimes throughout the Ukrainian war. As long as Putin stays in power, there’s virtually no probability of his arrest.
International criminal tribunals just like the ICC have a two-fold problem. First, these tribunals don’t have any real international police force to perform arrests.
Second, governments implicated within the alleged crimes of their leaders often try to obstruct the work of international tribunals by not extraditing suspects and trying to attack the tribunals as biased.
The problem of enforcement, as my scholarship has showncould allow the leaders of a robust country corresponding to Israel or an entity corresponding to Hamas to avoid arrest warrants issued by international courts – provided the suspects remain inside their country or territory.
Israel is in this example just isn’t a celebration to the ICC, meaning that he has never agreed to abide by his judgments or arrest orders and doesn’t otherwise recognize the court’s jurisdiction. The United States and other countries, including Qatar, where a minimum of one in every of the Hamas leaders named in Khan’s arrest warrant lives, are also not members of the ICC and don’t have any legal obligation to make arrests.
If the ICC pre-trial chamber approves Khan’s request for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, they’ll have the option to go to meet US leaders in Washington without fear of arrest. But now they’ll likely avoid travel to European Union countries, all of that are a part of the ICC, and will probably be forced to arrest Netanyahu.
All this also can contribute to Israel’s development further international isolation and pressure on his conduct throughout the war.
Issuing arrest warrants for Hamas leaders also risks stigmatizing Hamas internationally.
The United States, which at times strongly opposed the ICC, but also supported the ICC warned the ad hoc court, as was the case within the ICC war in Ukraine case that issuing arrest warrants for Israeli leaders could jeopardize a possible ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas.
Milosevic’s fall from power
Not all arrest warrants fail.
Attempt Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic from the mid-2000s shows how international tribunals might have the option to prosecute alleged war criminals after they lose power.
In 1993, when the war in Bosnia was still ongoing, the UN Security Council established a special court, called the Tribunal for International Criminal Tribunal for the previous Yugoslaviato address crimes committed during regional wars.
This court indicted Serbian nationalist leader Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in 1999 throughout the ongoing war in Kosovo. Milosevic’s alleged crimes in Kosovo include a large ethnic cleansing campaign against Kosovo Albanians, the country’s largest ethnic group. Milosevic later faced additional charges for alleged crimes in Bosnia and Croatia.
However, when the indictment was issued, Milosevic was still in power and his government protected him from arrest. Milosevic lost the presidential election in late September 2000 and after widespread protests he gave in.
The United States promised the brand new democratic government in Serbia significant economic aid to speed up post-war recovery. This helped persuade the Serbian government to accomplish that arrest Milosevic and then move it to international tribunal in June 2001.
Jack Guez/AFP via Getty Images
A possible handbook for the leaders of Israel and Hamas
Milosevic trial was launched in February 2002but he died in prison in 2006, shortly before the top of the trial.
His trial continues to reveal that, under certain circumstances, international courts can overcome their lack of enforcement powers and bring high-level suspects to justice. International political pressures and incentives often play a pivotal role on this process.
As long as any political and military leaders facing potential arrest remain in power, it is probably going that no amount of political pressure or guarantees will persuade Israel, Qatar or other countries to cooperate with the international court and hand over any leaders in the event that they are indicted.
History also shows that even when Hamas leaders are overthrown or Israeli leaders lose the elections, there isn’t a guarantee that potential suspects will ever face the ICC.
There is broad public opposition to the ICC in Israel, encompassing politicians across the political spectrum condemning Khan’s request for arrest warrants.
Despite the undeniable fact that Khan can be searching for to prosecute Hamas leaders, Israeli politicians reacted to the ICC’s decision indignant requests for arrest.** Moreover, a minimum of within the short term, it is very unlikely that the United States will apply to its close ally, Israel, the identical pressure that it successfully applied to Serbia over the arrest of Milosevic after his fall from power.