Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Emrys

(8,828 posts)
6. According to the ICC, that's not the relevant consideration since Palestine is a signatory:
Mon Dec 1, 2025, 12:18 PM
Monday

But obviously, Israel begs to differ:

The ICC has jurisdiction over the situation in Palestine based on Palestine’s 2015 acceptance
and ratification of the Rome Statute, and its referral of the situation to the ICC, including
crimes committed since June 2014.

According to the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I decision of 21 November 2024, Palestine accepted
the jurisdiction of the ICC on 1 January 2015 under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute, which
allows a non-member state to accept the Court’s jurisdiction over crimes committed within
its territory. In parallel, Palestine ratified the Rome Statute, becoming a State Party.
The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I determined in 2021 that it has territorial jurisdiction over the
territory of Palestine, being the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967
(the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip).

Israel — not a State Party to the Rome Statute — has claimed that the ICC would not have
jurisdiction under Article 19(2) of the Rome Statute, arguing that Palestine does not have the
legal capacity to “delegate” jurisdiction to the ICC, while also asserting that the ICC cannot
exercise jurisdiction over Israeli nationals. However, the ICC rejected Israel’s challenge,
stating that the acceptance of jurisdiction by Israel is not required because the Court’s
jurisdiction is based on territory rather than nationality, and does not imply any “delegation”
from the territorial state, nor any consent from the State of nationality. This means that the
ICC can prosecute crimes committed on the territory of a State Party, even if the person
accused is a national of a non-member state. Jurisdiction in this case is based on where the
crime occurred, Palestine, and not the nationality of the alleged perpetrators.

Israel has also argued that its claim that Palestine is not a state should be enough to invalidate
ICC jurisdiction. However, the ICC also dismissed this argument, stating that it had already
ruled on this matter in 2021, and this decision stands as res judicata—meaning it has already
been adjudicated.

In conclusion, despite Israel’s non-membership of the Rome Statute and its refusal to
recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction, the ICC has based its jurisdiction on
Palestine’s accession to the Rome Statute and the principle of territorial jurisdiction,
affirming its legal authority to investigate and prosecute alleged crimes committed
in Gaza and the West Bank (including East Jerusalem).

https://www.ecchr.eu/fileadmin/Q_As/ECCHR_QA_arrest_warrant_ICC_Netanjahu_Gallant_042025.pdf


I haven't thought about it deeply and IANAL, but the initial impression is that this principle would open up the US and its citizens to charges for acts committed on any signatory nation's territory.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

You could have saved yourself time drray23 Monday #1
But was Israel a signatory of the Rome Treaty when the ICC charged Netanyahu? Anxy Monday #4
According to the ICC, that's not the relevant consideration since Palestine is a signatory: Emrys Monday #6
Exactly. Not being a signatory isn't automatic immunity. Anxy Monday #9
Curious as to what you think would happen if Ven. were to bring charges at the ICC MarineCombatEngineer Monday #12
I think if it wasn't Venezuela waters, ICC would issue an arrest warrant Anxy Monday #14
And just who do you think will actually arrest either Pedonald or Kegsbreath? nt MarineCombatEngineer Monday #15
I don't think it's likely. But the police of a willing state Anxy Monday #17
That I can agree with, MarineCombatEngineer Monday #21
Exactly. Nt Anxy Monday #23
The ICC has zero jurisdiction over the US, MarineCombatEngineer Monday #2
Was Israel a signatory when an arrest warrant was issued against Netanyahu Anxy Monday #5
See my reply above (both you and the person you were replying to). n/t Emrys Monday #7
Has Nuttyahoo been arrested? MarineCombatEngineer Monday #10
You initially argued the ICC didn't have jurisdiction Anxy Monday #13
The ICC does not have jurisdiction over US matters, MarineCombatEngineer Monday #16
You have not explained why you think ICC doesn't have jurisdiction in this case Anxy Monday #19
You really think Israeli Security Services would allow a foreign nation to arrest Nuttyahoo? MarineCombatEngineer Monday #18
That's beside the point Anxy Monday #22
Phase One: Collect Underpants. flvegan Monday #3
Your premise is invalid as Israel is not a poor country Jose Garcia Monday #8
It is valid because I addressed Israel after addressing poor countries. Anxy Monday #11
They did issue a warrant for Putin - is Russia a "poor country"? muriel_volestrangler Monday #20
My post concluded ICC is addressing the poor country problem Anxy Monday #24
Anyone convicted by the ICC will have to be careful where they travel. Swede Monday #25
Thanks nt Anxy Monday #26
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The ICC must investigate ...»Reply #6