The Importance of Implementing Israeli Arrest Warrants for the Credibility of the International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has found itself at the centre of controversy once again, with the non-execution of arrest warrants for key figures accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The most prominent figures on the ICC's wanted list include Russian President Vladimir Putin, Sudan's former president Omar Bashir, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In a surprising turn of events, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz suggested purely political reasons for not arresting Netanyahu, a decision that has been seen as shocking by some observers. The ICC issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and other Israeli officials in 2024, accusing them of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. However, despite traveling through the airspaces of several European countries, Netanyahu was not arrested by European powers in July.

The ICC's stance was clear - the issuance of arrest warrants against the Netanyahu government was carried out despite threats and reprisals from a strong network of powers supporting Israel. The court described the sanctions imposed by the US on ICC officials as a "flagrant attack against the independence of an impartial judicial institution" and an "affront to millions of innocent victims across the world."

Meanwhile, a rare win for the ICC came in the form of the arrest of Khaled Mohamed Ali Al-Hishri, a senior member of the Special Deterrence Forces militia, by German authorities at Berlin Brandenburg Airport. Al-Hishri is accused of murdering, torturing, and raping detainees at Tripoli's Mitiga prison between 2015 and 2020. His arrest brought hope of justice for victims of war crimes in Libya.

The ICC's challenges are not just limited to non-execution of arrest warrants. By its nature, the court has often been heavily criticized, with non-members arguing that the ICC's authority would challenge their sovereignty, and others claiming the court is not powerful enough. The EU has struggled to agree on any significant punitive measures, with deep divisions between those more supportive of Israel like Hungary and those taking a stronger stance like Spain and Ireland.

The ICC now has 125 state parties, but crucially dozens remain outside, including India, China, and Russia. The court has no enforcement mechanisms of its own and relies entirely on state cooperation. This reluctance of states to act, particularly in high-profile cases, signals that political considerations can override binding legal obligations.

As the ICC continues to face these challenges, it is clear that strengthening its position is crucial. According to Ellis, the best way to do this is to encourage more countries - particularly major powers - to sign up to the Rome Statute. The ICC's ability to bring those accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity to justice depends on it.