John Reynolds
Part of it has to do with the slow pace at which international law generally moves; part of it has to do with the various political obstacles and procedural objections that invariably arise in the specific case of Palestine. When the office of the prosecutor in the ICC requests arrest warrants, that request goes to a pretrial chamber of three judges who look at the material submitted and make their determination.
In the case of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there was a very swift and decisive response from international institutions, including the ICC.
On average, it would normally take a couple of months for them to do so before issuing a set of arrest warrants, though the institutions of international justice can also act quickly when there is a will to do so. In the case of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there was a very swift and decisive response from international institutions, including the ICC. The court issued the arrest warrants for Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova within three weeks of the prosecutor’s request. But it is not unprecedented that there would be a bit of time taken going through the various steps of the process.
There were a few things in the mix in the Palestine case. After the application for warrants was made in May 2024 — already inexcusably late in most people’s eyes — there was a request put in by the British government for the ICC to review whether it actually had jurisdiction to go ahead with this case. The court had already decided back in 2021 that it did, but the British challenge meant the court had to go through a process of reopening the question for submissions by other member states and interested groups and reviewing all that material.
Germany put in another objection as well where they tried to argue that the ICC should not prosecute Israeli leaders until Israel’s own legal system has…
Auteur: John Reynolds
