8 ms·

The US states: > The ICC was established by its state parties as a court of limited jurisdiction. Those limits are rooted in principles of complementarity, wh

by jd3 2y ago

The US states: > The ICC was established by its state parties as a court of limited jurisdiction. Those limits are rooted in principles of complementarity, which do not appear to have been applied here amid the Prosecutor’s rush to seek these arrest warrants rather than allowing the Israeli legal system a full and timely opportunity to proceed.[0] --- The ICC defines: > 1. Complementarity: The principle of complementarity governs the exercise of the Court’s jurisdiction. This distinguishes the Court in several significant ways from other known institutions, including the international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (the ICTY and the ICTR). The Statute recognizes that States have the first responsibility and right to prosecute international crimes. The ICC may only exercise jurisdiction where national legal systems fail to do so, including where they purport to act but in reality are unwilling or unable to genuinely carry out proceedings. The principle of complementarity is based both on respect for the primary jurisdiction of States and on considerations of efficiency and effectiveness, since States will generally have the best access to evidence and witnesses and the resources to carry out proceedings. Moreover, there are limits on the number of prosecutions the ICC, a single institution, can feasibly conduct.[1] namely, > The ICC may only exercise jurisdiction where national legal systems fail to do so, including where they purport to act but in reality are unwilling or unable to genuinely carry out proceedings. The US argues that the ICC has not adequately allowed this process to play out through the courts in Israel. --- The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs states: > The criteria of unwillingness or inability to carry out proceedings would involve some indication of purposely shielding the accused from criminal responsibility or a lack of intent to bring the person to justice. This may be inferred from political interference or deliberate obstruction and delay, from institutional deficiencies due to political subordination of the legal system, or procedural irregularities indicating a lack of willingness and inability to investigate or prosecute genuinely.[2] --- Imo the hermeneutics are clear, though it will be up to the lawyers from either side to make arguments in favor of/against. [0]: https://www.state.gov/warrant-applications-by-the-international-criminal-court/ https://www.state.gov/warrant-applications-by-the-internatio... [1]: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/NR/rdonlyres/20BB4494-70F9-4698-8E30-907F631453ED/281984/complementarity.pdf https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/NR/rdonlyres/20B... [2]: https://jcpa.org/article/would-judicial-reforms-in-israel-open-up-the-israeli-military-to-charges-of-war-crimes/ https://jcpa.org/article/would-judicial-reforms-in-israel-op....

nabla9 2y ago
a counterpoint "Prosecutor’s rush to seek these arrest warrants" does not seem to be true. ICC prosecutor did not bring this case quickly without warning. He has consistently demanded that action must be taken or he will prosecute. Israel's Supreme Court has the authority to conduct judicial review of laws and government decisions and intervene in exceptional, extreme cases. Israeli prosecutors have had time to charge. >Since last year, in Ramallah, in Cairo, in Israel and in Rafah, I have consistently emphasised that international humanitarian law demands that Israel take urgent action to immediately allow access to humanitarian aid in Gaza at scale. I specifically underlined that starvation as a method of war and the denial of humanitarian relief constitute Rome Statute offences. I could not have been clearer. >As I also repeatedly underlined in my public statements, those who do not comply with the law should not complain later when my Office takes action. That day has come. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-... btw. The US has demanded same and put conditions to military aid.
- YZF 2y ago
  But the amount of aid going into the Gaza strip has increased dramatically (up to the Rafah crossing being taken). i.e. Israel did take action on this matter. EDIT: It's also important to note the odd timing of asking for arrest warrants for the Hamas leadership at the same time as the Israeli arrest warrants. Clearly unlike Israel there is no chance in *$#@ that Hamas would prosecute their own leadership for violation of international humanitarian law. The Hamas violations have also occurred earlier. I.e. Israel should be given more time for its independent legal system to evaluate whether or not there's a case and pursue it. Israel justice system has put prime ministers and presidents on trial. Hamas shouldn't be given any time. Given this you'd think arrest warrants for Hamas leadership would come a lot sooner. Since this isn't the case one has to wonder if the prosecutor is doing a "both sides" kind of thing, maybe afraid of backlash if they only go after one side, in which case the response of Israel to the request to increase aid (which has happened) is not relevant.
  - downWidOutaFite 2y ago

by jd3 2y ago

nabla9 2y ago

a counterpoint "Prosecutor’s rush to seek these arrest warrants" does not seem to be true. ICC prosecutor did not bring this case quickly without warning. He has consistently demanded that action must be taken or he will prosecute. Israel's Supreme Court has the authority to conduct judicial review of laws and government decisions and intervene in exceptional, extreme cases. Israeli prosecutors have had time to charge. >Since last year, in Ramallah, in Cairo, in Israel and in Rafah, I have consistently emphasised that international humanitarian law demands that Israel take urgent action to immediately allow access to humanitarian aid in Gaza at scale. I specifically underlined that starvation as a method of war and the denial of humanitarian relief constitute Rome Statute offences. I could not have been clearer. >As I also repeatedly underlined in my public statements, those who do not comply with the law should not complain later when my Office takes action. That day has come. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-... btw. The US has demanded same and put conditions to military aid.

YZF 2y ago
But the amount of aid going into the Gaza strip has increased dramatically (up to the Rafah crossing being taken). i.e. Israel did take action on this matter. EDIT: It's also important to note the odd timing of asking for arrest warrants for the Hamas leadership at the same time as the Israeli arrest warrants. Clearly unlike Israel there is no chance in *$#@ that Hamas would prosecute their own leadership for violation of international humanitarian law. The Hamas violations have also occurred earlier. I.e. Israel should be given more time for its independent legal system to evaluate whether or not there's a case and pursue it. Israel justice system has put prime ministers and presidents on trial. Hamas shouldn't be given any time. Given this you'd think arrest warrants for Hamas leadership would come a lot sooner. Since this isn't the case one has to wonder if the prosecutor is doing a "both sides" kind of thing, maybe afraid of backlash if they only go after one side, in which case the response of Israel to the request to increase aid (which has happened) is not relevant.
- downWidOutaFite 2y ago