ICC invites Shurat Hadin to submit observations on warrants against Netanyahu, Galant, and Sinwar

In an unprecedented move, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has invited Shurat HaDin, an Israeli legal organization, to contribute to the ongoing debate over potential arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Galant, and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. This invitation marks a significant escalation in the legal and political tensions surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The ICC's involvement began in May 2024, when the Prosecutor sought arrest warrants against Netanyahu, Galant, and Hamas leaders, accusing them of war crimes. The United States and the previous UK government swiftly condemned the move. The UK then requested that the ICC reconsider the relevance of the Oslo Accords in assessing these warrants, reigniting a long-standing debate over the court’s jurisdiction, a matter that had been contentious since 2020 when the ICC first considered investigating Israeli actions.

As the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber opened the floor to submissions from various organizations, experts, and countries, Shurat HaDin initially decided not to participate, having already filed submissions in previous proceedings. However, in a rare move, the ICC directly reached out to Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, founder of Shurat HaDin, inviting the organization to submit observations. This prompted a change of heart, and on August 12, 2024, Shurat HaDin submitted its arguments, supported by families of victims from the October 7 attack on Israel and those involved in earlier ICC proceedings.

The submission challenges the ICC's authority to prosecute Israelis, accusing the Prosecutor of bias and procedural failures. Shurat HaDin argues that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over Israel because the Palestinian Authority (PA) is not recognized as a state under the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. Additionally, they assert that the PA does not have criminal jurisdiction over Israelis as outlined in the Oslo Accords, and therefore cannot grant such authority to the ICC. The submission also warns that further erosion of the Oslo Accords could lead to increased violence, similar to the Ramallah lynching in 2000. 

Furthermore, Shurat HaDin criticizes the Prosecutor for failing to adhere to the principle of complementarity, which requires that a country be given the opportunity to investigate accusations against it before the ICC intervenes. By bypassing this process, the Prosecutor has, according to Shurat HaDin, damaged cooperation with Israeli authorities, jeopardizing both the ICC's investigation into Hamas and Israel's own inquiries.

The submission also condemns what it sees as the creation of a false moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas by simultaneously seeking arrest warrants for leaders from both sides. Shurat HaDin argues that the Prosecutor should have taken action against Hamas much earlier, especially regarding the holding of hostages. “Prosecutor did nothing – not on day 1, not on day 50, not even on the 100th day of the hostages' captivity. Prosecutor waited no less than 227 days, during which he knew hostages continue to suffer the most horrible atrocities, including well-established evidence of their being sexually abused and tortured," the submission emphasizes.

This invitation to Shurat HaDin represents a critical moment in the ongoing legal and political struggle over the ICC’s role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, raising important questions about international law and justice.