THE HAGUE: Israel has asked the International Criminal Court to dismiss its arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant while ICC judges reconsider complex jurisdictional questions.
In a 14-page document dated May 9 but posted on the ICC website on Monday, Israel argued the warrants issued in November were null and void while judges weigh a previous Israeli challenge to the ICC鈥檚 jurisdiction in the case.
In a ruling that made headlines around the world, the ICC found 鈥渞easonable grounds鈥� to believe Netanyahu and Gallant bore 鈥渃riminal responsibility鈥� for war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the war in Gaza.
The court also issued a war crimes warrant against top Hamas commander Mohammed Deif over the October 7 attacks that sparked the conflict. The case against Deif was dropped in February after his death.
Israel, not one of the ICC鈥檚 125 members, challenged the court鈥檚 jurisdiction but judges on the ICC鈥檚 鈥淧re-Trial Chamber鈥� dismissed the bid and issued the arrest warrants.
But last month, the ICC鈥檚 Appeals Chamber ruled the Pre-Trial Chamber was wrong to dismiss the challenge and ordered it to look again in detail at Israel鈥檚 arguments.
Israel says now that the arrest warrants should not stay in place while this complex and lengthy process is ongoing.
鈥淯nless and until the Pre-Trial Chamber has ruled on the substance of the jurisdiction challenge... the prerequisite jurisdictional finding does not exist,鈥� Israel argued.
鈥淚t follows that the arrest warrants issued on 21 November 2024 must be withdrawn or vacated pending the Pre-Trial Chamber鈥檚 determination of Israel鈥檚 jurisdictional challenge.鈥�
Israel and its allies reacted furiously to the warrants issued on November 21, Netanyahu describing it as an 鈥渁nti-Semitic decision鈥� and then US president Joe Biden slamming it as 鈥渙utrageous.鈥�
Technically, any member of the ICC is required to arrest Netanyahu if he travels there, although the court has no independent power to enforce warrants.
Israel argued in its submission that Netanyahu could theoretically be arrested while the court was still weighing whether it had jurisdiction in the case.
鈥淒epriving persons of their liberty on the basis of an arrest warrant issued in the absence of the necessary legal pre-conditions is an egregious violation of fundamental human rights and of the rule of law,鈥� Israel argued.
Allowing the warrants to stay in place during the deliberations 鈥渋s unlawful and undermines the legitimacy of the court,鈥� said Israel.