Connect with us

RSS

What You Need to Know About the ICC Arrest Warrants for Israeli Leaders

The International Criminal Court, The Hague, Netherlands. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

You may have heard that the ICC (International Criminal Court) is on a path toward issuing arrest warrants against Israeli leaders. But you may not know how this came about, where we are in the process, and what it could mean for Israel, America, and the entire free world.

To help you cut through the disorganized reports, sensationalism, and widespread misinformation, here is a thorough and clear update — from a lawyer.

The ICC  is distinct from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). At the ICJ, South Africa is attempting to make a case against Israel for genocide, which will take years to complete. However in the meantime, South Africa has repeatedly presented emergency motions for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire, including an attempt just last week which does not technically accomplish that goal, but comes perilously close.

Separately, but in parallel, the ICC prosecutor, Karim A. Khan, has brought a request to the ICC to issue international arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as several Hamas leaders.

If granted, these arrest warrants will make it impossible for Netanyahu to leave Israel and enter any of the 124 countries that are members of the ICC (approximately two thirds of the world), as well any additional countries that have mutual law enforcement agreements, such as all Interpol countries.

The United States is not an ICC member, and would be unlikely to enforce the warrant, however most European countries are either ICC or Interpol members (or both), as well as much of South America and some of the Asia-Pacific.

So how did this all come about?

The ICJ has jurisdiction over Israel because Israel signed the Genocide Convention of 1948. In fact, Israel helped draft the document, which is meaningfully connected to the very soul of Israel, as the whole concept is an outgrowth of the Holocaust. It is therefore a cruel irony that Hamas and its allies would weaponize the ICJ against Israel. Paradoxically the ICJ does not have jurisdiction over Hamas, so if they do issue a “ceasefire” order, it will be one in which Israel ceases, but Hamas fires.

By contrast, the ICC does not have jurisdiction over Israel, except insofar as the Court unilaterally decided that it does.

Specifically, the ICC is charged with enforcing an international treaty called the Rome Statute, which was ratified by 124 countries but notably, not by Israel or the United States. How then did the ICC come to the conclusion that it can enforce a treaty over a country that never actually agreed to it?

The ICC’s rules hold that the Court may exercise jurisdiction over any events that occur inside the borders of a member state. The ICC recognizes a Palestinian state, and includes it as a member of the ICC. Although the “state” of Palestine has no recognized borders or territory, the ICC nonetheless ruled in 2015 that events occurring inside the West Bank and the Gaza Strip count as being “inside” the “borders” of the “State of Palestine,” and are therefore subject to the Court’s jurisdiction.

In recent days, the ICC prosecutor accused Israel of a number of violations of the Rome Statute, which is paradoxical on several levels at once:  for one, Israel never agreed to be bound by the Rome Statute, and secondly, the specific accusations are patently untrue.

For example, the prosecutor accuses Israel of preventing the flow of humanitarian aid, even though according to well verified data, Gaza has received enough aid to feed every man, woman, and child twice over. (There is nonetheless an apparent food shortage as both Hamas and UNRWA employees steal much of the food.) The prosecutor accuses Israel of closing the crossings by which aid enters the Gaza Strip (the crossings are actually open and active despite Hamas’ frequent bombings of the crossings) and, of course, Israel stands accused of genocide, despite taking historic measures to protect civilians, and producing the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio for a conflict of this type in human history.

Moreover, by requesting arrest warrants against both Israeli leaders and Hamas terror operatives, Prosecutor Khan has effectively drawn an astonishing moral and legal equivalence between Israel, a modern Western democracy with a famously independent judiciary, and one of the world’s most notorious terror groups — and a parallel between the October 7 terrorist massacre, and the self defense of the very victims of that massacre.

To be clear, the arrest warrants have not yet been issued, but  are currently being presented to the ICC’s panel of 18 judges for approval. Yet this arrest approval process is not a trial in which both sides present evidence and make arguments. To the contrary, the prosecutor needs to show merely that there are “reasonable grounds” for the arrest warrants, but without the accused having a right to reply or to present evidence as part of that decision. This process is roughly comparable to what American courts call a “Grand Jury hearing,” and American lawyers have an old  joke that in such hearings the evidentiary requirements are so low that, “a Grand Jury will indict a ham sandwich if you ask them to.”

So in a cruel paradox, by the ICC’s own rules, evidence is irrelevant, truth is irrelevant, and even reality itself is irrelevant. It is enough that the ICC prosecutor makes an accusation, and then world leaders who never even agreed to the Court’s jurisdiction can find themselves subject to its arrest powers. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that Khan will stop with Israeli leaders — by Khan’s logic, as expressed in this prosecution, it is possible that IDF soldiers and former IDF soldiers (in other words, most Israelis) could eventually face international arrest as well.

So what happens now?

It is not clear how long it will take the judges to approve the arrest warrants — deliberations could take anywhere from days to months. It is rare that the ICC judges would refuse to approve an arrest warrant, but this case may be different because the United States has announced that it will take action.

Fearing that America’s enemies could use the ICC as a weapon against American leaders and soldiers, the US not only refused to join the ICC, but also passed a bipartisan law in 2002 affirming that America would protect American service people and allies against a weaponization of the Court. A bipartisan bill currently working its way through Congress envisions placing sanctions on the ICC prosecutor, the judges, and their families. This would limit their ability to travel, and also may shut down their bank accounts and other access to basic day to day life necessities — in other words, this is a powerful diplomatic tool.

Although it is not clear what will happen in the coming days and months with respect to the ICC, one thing is clear: Hamas, which cannot defeat the IDF on the battlefield, is attempting to weaponize international law to defeat Israel off the battlefield. Whether they will succeed, and whether other terror organizations use such weapons in the future, depends on how Israel and America respond in the days to come.

An important additional note: many throughout the world, including some Israelis, blithely say that some Israeli leaders are “criminals” and deserve to be arrested (a common refrain in politics). Yet the specific claims against Israeli leaders in this case do not relate to normal domestic political issues, such as corruption, judicial reform, or the like. To the contrary, the case against Israel relates to issues on which almost all Israelis agree — specifically the performance of the IDF and Israel’s self defense.

In fact, it is notable that the Israeli prime minister is not the “Commander in Chief ” of the armed forces as the US president is. Rather, that role belongs to the war cabinet, which is composed of Israeli representatives from the right, left, and center, and enjoys broad public support. In other words, a criticism of the IDF or of Israel’s self defense in Gaza is not merely a criticism of Netanyahu as some like to claim, but rather of the entire State of Israel and the broad consensus of the Israeli people.

Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.

The post What You Need to Know About the ICC Arrest Warrants for Israeli Leaders first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

RSS

A pro-Israel rally at the University of Toronto was headlined by Columbia University professor Shai Davidai

Around 200 people gathered for a pro-Israel demonstration at University of Toronto’s downtown campus at King’s College Circle—which was the site of one of Canada’s largest pro-Palestinian encampments during May […]

The post A pro-Israel rally at the University of Toronto was headlined by Columbia University professor Shai Davidai appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

Continue Reading

RSS

‘Not Welcome’: New Pro-Hamas Campaign Aims to Abolish Hillel Campus Chapters

A statue of George Washington tied with a Palestinian flag and a keffiyeh inside a pro-Hamas encampment is pictured at George Washington University in Washington, DC, US, May 2, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Craig Hudson

The campus group National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) is waging a campaign to gut Jewish life in academia, calling for the abolition of Hillel International campus chapters, the largest collegiate organization for Jewish students in the world.

“Over the past several decades, Hillel has monopolized for Jewish campus life into a pipeline for pro-Israel indoctrination, genocide-apologia, and material support to the Zionist project and its crimes,” a social media account operating the campaign, titled #DropHillel, said in a manifesto published last week. “Across the country, Hillel chapters have invited Israeli soldiers to their campuses; promoted propaganda trips such as birthright; and organized charity drives for the Israeli military.”

It continued, “Such actions reveal Hillel’s ideological and material investment in Zionism, despite the organization’s facade as being simply a ‘Jewish cultural space.’”

DropHillel claims to be “Jewish-led,” although only a small minority of Jews oppose Zionism, and the group has been linked to and promoted by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapters.

Hillel International has provided Jewish students a home away from home during the academic year. However, NSJP says it wants to “weaken” it and “dismantle oppression.”

The idea has already been picked up by pro-Hamas student groups at one college, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, according to The Daily Tar Heel, the school’s official student newspaper. On Oct. 9, it reported, a member of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) unveiled the idea for “no more Hillel” during a rally which, among other things, demanded removing Israel from UNC’s study abroad program and adopting the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement. Addressing the comments to the paper days later, SJP, which has been linked to Islamist terrorist organizations, proclaimed that shuttering Hillel is a coveted goal of the anti-Zionist movement.

“Zionism is a racist supremacist ideology advocating for the creation and sustenance of an ethnostate through the expulsion and annihilation of native people,” the group told the paper. “Therefore, any group that advocates for a supremacist ideology — be it the KKK, the Proud Boys, Hillel, or Heels for Israel — should not be welcome on campus.”

The #DropHillel campaign came amid an unprecedented surge in anti-Israel incidents on college campuses, which, according to a report published last month by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), have reached crisis levels.

Revealing a “staggering” 477 percent increase in anti-Zionist activity involving assault, vandalism, and other phenomena, the report — titled “Anti-Israel Activism on US Campuses, 2023-2024” — painted a bleak picture of America’s higher education system poisoned by political extremism and hate.

“As the year progressed, Jewish students and Jewish groups on campus came under unrelenting scrutiny for any association, actual or perceived, with Israel or Zionism,” the report said. “This often led to the harassment of Jewish members of campus communities and vandalism of Jewish institutions. In some cases, it led to assault. These developments were underpinned by a steady stream of rhetoric from anti-Israel activists expressing explicit support for US-designated terrorists organizations, such as Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and others.”

The report added that 10 campuses accounted for 16 percent of all incidents tracked by ADL researchers, with Columbia University and the University of Michigan combining for 90 anti-Israel incidents — 52 and 38, respectively. Harvard University, the University of California – Los Angeles, Rutgers University New Brunswick, Stanford University, Cornell University, and others filled out the rest of the top 10. Violence, it continued, was most common at universities in the state of California, where anti-Zionist activists punched a Jewish student for filming him at a protest.

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post ‘Not Welcome’: New Pro-Hamas Campaign Aims to Abolish Hillel Campus Chapters first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

‘Muslim for Trump’ Launches Initiatives in Key Battleground States, Says Candidate Will Bring ‘Peace’ to Gaza

Former US President Donald Trump is seen at a campaign event in South Carolina. Photo: Reuters/Sam Wolfe

The “Muslims for Trump” organization has officially launched initiatives to help elect Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump to the White House, arguing that he would be more likely to end the war in Gaza than Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. 

In a statement released on Monday, the group said it will focus on recruiting Muslim voters in key battleground states such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and North Carolina. The organization both praised Trump for his supposed “peace-focused” approach to ending the war in Gaza and condemned Harris for helping facilitate a so-called “genocide.”

“After meeting with President Trump, it was clear to me he is the right leader for Muslims to get behind,” Rabiul Chowdhury, co-founder of Muslims for Trump and former co-chair of the “Abandon Harris Movement,” said in a statement.

Chowdhury added that during his discussions with Trump, the former president vowed to “ending the escalation of wars and bringing peace to war-torn regions.” In contrast to Trump’s promise to stop the “bloodshed” in Gaza, he claimed, Harris has “recklessly pushed us toward World War III.”

Chowdhury, a self-described “peace advocate,” urged the Muslim community not to fall victim to supposed “misinformation” campaigns by the media and Democrats that paint the former president as hostile to immigrants. He claimed that the former president’s focus is on “ending war, not dividing families through false immigration claims.”

Samra Luqman, chair of the Michigan chapter of Muslims for Trump, underscored the need to punish the Biden administration for what he described as supporting a “genocide” in Gaza. 

“The goal of this election is to hold the Biden administration accountable for a genocide. No amount of fear mongering or scare tactics will persuade my community into forgiving the mutilation, live-burning, and genocide of over 200,000 people,” he said.

According to data produced by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, roughly 40,000 people have died in Gaza since the war began last October. Israel has said that its forces have killed about 20,000 Hamas terrorists during its military campaign.

Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to evacuate areas before it targets them and to warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication.

On the organization Muslims for Trump’s official website, it claims that the Abraham Accords, a series of historic, Trump administration-brokered normalization agreements between Israel and several countries in the Arab world, helped stabilize the Middle East. It also says that had Trump not lost the 2020 presidential race, the so-called “genocide” could have been prevented.

Under Trump’s leadership, the Abraham Accords were brokered, fostering peaceful relations between Israel and several Arab countries. Supporters might argue that Trump’s diplomacy prioritized peace and stability in the Middle East, reducing the likelihood of large-scale conflicts like genocide,” the group wrote. 

Over the course of his campaign, Trump has repeatedly touted his support for the Jewish state during his singular term in office. Trump has boasted about his administration’s work in fostering the Abraham Accords, promising to resume efforts to strengthen them if he were to win November’s US presidential election. 

Harsh US sanctions levied on Iran under Trump crippled the Iranian economy and led its foreign exchange reserves to plummet. Trump and his Republican supporters in the US Congress have criticized the Biden administration for renewing billions of dollars in US sanctions waivers, which had the effect of unlocking frozen funds and allowing the country to access previously inaccessible hard currency.

Trump also recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a strategic region on Israel’s northern border previously controlled by Syria, and also moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, recognizing the city as the Jewish state’s capital.

Despite Harris’s repeated efforts to woo Muslim voters, polling data indicates that the demographic has made a dramatic swing away from the Democratic Party. Polling data from the Arab American Institute reveals that Trump slightly edges Harris among Muslim voters by a margin of 42 to 41 percent. A report from the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) shows that Green Party candidate Jill Stein leads Harris and Trump with Muslim voters in the key swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona.

The post ‘Muslim for Trump’ Launches Initiatives in Key Battleground States, Says Candidate Will Bring ‘Peace’ to Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News