It's not that simple. It's not the ICC's role to investigate and prosecute every single instance of a possible war crime, as that would be impractical and beyon

It's not that simple. It's not the ICC's role to investigate and prosecute every single instance of a possible war crime, as that would be impractical and beyond the means of even a massive staff. Instead, what they're looking for are cases of larger scale and sustained abuses, especially at the direction of senior leadership. Also importantly, the ICC is a 'court of last resort' meaning it complements existing national judicial systems rather than replacing them. So in cases like the Brereton Report there's no need for the ICC to step in because the Australian judiciary is already handling the situation adequately. It's not a court in the traditional national sense. Afghanistan for instance requested deferrals in the ICC's investigation of actions on its territory, with the ICC resuming the investigation only in 2022 after determining that the Afghan judiciary was neither pursuing its own investigations nor interested in requesting an extension of the deferral. The ICC's jurisdiction is also dependent on various factors such as whether the alleged crimes happened either on the territory of a state party or were committed by or against one, and that's not always the case. For instance it only has jurisdiction over actions committed after 1 May 2003 in Afghanistan, as that was when Afghanistan became a formal state party to the ICC Treaty.