British lawyers have mounted a challenge against the International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, demanding a review of the arrest warrant issued against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which they claim is based on “entirely false” allegations.

UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) has warned that if Khan, who is also a British barrister, does not re-examine the evidence supporting the warrant, the group will report him to the UK Bar Standards Board for potential misconduct.

UKLFI’s letter to Khan alleges that “highly relevant evidence” has emerged since the arrest warrant was issued against Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant which they claim undermines the charges. The new evidence has not been put forward to the judges, something that the lawyers argue “amounts to a serious lack of integrity.”

“Every phrase of every sentence of [Khan’s] published summary of his applications for their arrest is false. It is a travesty that would do credit to the prosecutor of Albert Dreyfus,” Jonathan Turner, the chief executive of UKLFI and one of the three signatories of the letter, told The Algemeiner in a statement.

Dreyfus was a French army officer falsely convicted of espionage in a landmark case that sparked antisemitic violence across France.

UKLFI’s letter was released a day after the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) published a report highlighting past remarks from Khan, prior to his appointment as the UN court’s top prosecutor, in which he sharply criticized the International Criminal Court’s prosecution for its inadequate standards of proof, going so far as to describe the court as “not seaworthy.”

The Algemeiner contacted Khan’s office for a response to the allegations but did not receive a reply.

The International Criminal Court (ICC), under Khan’s leadership, has actively pursued arrest warrants against officials from both Israel and the Gaza-ruling Hamas terror group, prompting outrage from Israel at the implied comparison between the sides.

The ICC has charged Netanyahu and Gallant with war crimes in Gaza, accusing them of actions such as using starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally targeting civilians.

The lawyers asserted that the ICC has failed to consider exonerating evidence and has presented a deeply misleading picture of the events. The 24-page rebuttal also disputes claims that Israel imposed a “total siege” on Gaza, arguing instead that humanitarian aid was allowed and that services like water and electricity were not intentionally cut off. In one instance, the prosecution relied on findings from a March report about famine in parts of the Gaza Strip. The report was discredited in a June review by the Famine Review Committee (FRC) as “implausible,” but the chief prosecutor did not update his arrest application accordingly.

In another instance, the UKLFI lawyers vehemently contested the claims that Israel intentionally disrupted essential utilities, arguing instead that Israeli forces undertook repairs on water pipelines, while Hamas was responsible for destroying nine out of ten power lines supplying Gaza from Israel.

Khan has come under fire for making his surprise demand for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on the same day in May that he suddenly canceled a long-planned visit to both Gaza and Israel to collect evidence of alleged war crimes. The last-second cancellation infuriated US and British leaders, according to Reuters, which reported that the trip would have offered Israeli leaders a first opportunity to present their position and outline any action they were taking to respond to the war crime allegations.

“This matters to more than just Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Gallant. If the prosecutor can have the court issue arrest warrants on the basis of bogus allegations, no one is safe from the risk of arrest and possibly years of imprisonment in The Hague, even if eventually acquitted,” Turner said.

Only the prosecutor himself decides what information is provided to the court when it considers whether to issue an arrest warrant, Turner explained, putting him in a “very powerful position.”

“He is supposed to act impartially, seeking truth objectively, obtaining and providing evidence that shows innocence as well as guilt,” he said, but added that now he was seeking Netanyahu and Gallant’s arrests “on the basis of completely false information.”

One of the key points of contention is the killing of three humanitarian aid workers from World Central Kitchen by Israeli forces, which the ICC cited as a war crime. The UKLFI letter references an Australian-led investigation that found the Israel Defense forces (IDF) had mistakenly identified aid vehicles as threats, and those involved were disciplined — and in some cases, dismissed entirely — for failing to follow engagement protocols.

In a 43-page essay published in 2013, eight years before he began his ICC appointment, Khan described the court as “a think tank of a court divorced or unfamiliar with the realities of criminal investigations and courtroom litigation.”

ICC procedures, he asserted, allowed the prosecutor “to submit and rely on anonymous summaries of witness evidence that may be significantly lacking in substance, coherence, or both” and cited cases in which suspects were wrongly confirmed for trial.

Three years later, in a 2016 interview, Khan described the ICC as not “seaworthy.” The top UN Court needed to be “repaired significantly”; otherwise “international justice and the credibility of the ICC” was in jeopardy.

“You must get it right in the investigative stage,” he said.

“Like an alcoholic,” Khan went on, “the first step [is] to accept that there’s a problem.” International investigations, Khan said, were a “serious business” that should not be conducted in the glare of the CNN, BBC World, and Al-Jazeera news cycle — which he said is a “disaster brought to the ICC.”

He accused the Office of the Top Prosecutor, over which he would later preside, of submitting “dog’s breakfasts” of cases that “peddled lies.”

Khan was previously the defense counsel for then-Liberian President Charles McArthur Ghankay Taylor, who was later found guilty of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder, rape, slavery, and the use of child soldiers, becoming the first former head of state to be convicted for crimes against humanity by an international tribunal since the Nuremburg trials of Nazi leaders following World War II.

The post Lawyers Group Challenges ICC Prosecutor Over ‘Bogus’ Arrest Warrant for Netanyahu first appeared on Algemeiner.com.