Postponement Of Issuing Arrest Letter Of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, ICC Considered Munafik

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu/PHOTO via Instagram @b.netanyahu

JAKARTA - The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces charges of typhoid for delaying a request for an arrest warrant by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for more than five months.

In fact, the arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin was approved in just 24 days.

As reported by ANTARA from Anadolu, Tuesday, October 29, requests for an arrest warrant, filed by the ICC Prosecutor's office on May 20 against Netanyahu, Gallant, and three Hamas leaders, have faced systematic obstacles from Israel and its allies.

The ICC acted quickly in cases related to Ukraine, namely issuing arrest warrants for six Russian officials, including Putin, in a matter of months.

In contrast, no arrest warrants have been issued in the Gaza case since the investigation began in 2019, thus showing significant delays and double standards.

The long delay in Palestinian investigations stems from Israeli spy operations targeting the ICC and its officials for nine years, coupled with the resignation of a judge who handled the case.

Problems became complicated after Britain challenged the jurisdiction of the ICC, following allegations of abuse against Prosecutor Karim Khan.

The Allegation Against Prosecutor Khan

Shortly after Khan filed a request for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, an investigation emerged over Khan's alleged violation of an ICC staff member.

The ICC Member State Assembly confirmed that the investigation was still ongoing, but did not find enough evidence to continue the case.

The time for this accusation to emerge, which coincided with the request for an arrest warrant, raised suspicions.

Motoc Judge Resignation

Judge Julia Motoc, who led the Presidangan Chamber that handled the case, resigned for health reasons and to ensure smooth running of judicial functions.

The ICC announced Judge Beti Hohler, a Slovenian judge who joined at the same time, would replace Motoc.

International law expert Dr. Owiso Owiso warned Motoc's resignation could extend the process.

Meanwhile, former UN official Craig Mokhiber criticized the sudden changes as suspicious in the midst of increased pressure from Israel and Western countries.

Mokhiber noted that Judge Hohler had previously suggested that Israeli officials be tried in domestic courts rather than at the ICC.

Systematic Postponement Since 2019

The delay in the Palestinian investigation began in 2015 when former ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda began the initial investigation. Although the investigation met the necessary criteria in 2019, the implementation was postponed due to a judicial debate over the Palestinian territories.

The formal investigation began in March 2021, but there has been no significant progress thus extending the postponement of the request regarding Netanyahu and Gallant.

In July 2024, Britain made the situation difficult by challenging the status of the Palestinian state and the jurisdiction of the ICC. Although Britain later withdrew from the process, the ICC received more than 60 similar proposals to extend the request for an arrest warrant.

US sanctions threats and Mossad disruptions

The ICC faces threats from the United States Senate, warning sanctions would be imposed if an arrest warrant was issued against Israeli officials.

The threat reminded previous measures, such as asset freezes of former prosecutor Bensouda and travel bans during Afghanistan's investigation.

Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, also interfered in the ICC operation. The former head of Mossad, Yossi Cohen, reportedly met secretly with Prosecutor Bensouda to persuade the prosecutor not to continue the case against Israeli personnel.

Some sources hint at Cohen taking a continuous approach and tend to threaten, including using personal information to intimidate Bensouda.

Such pressure has undermined ICC's independence and extended the investigation process, thus undermined the credibility and ability of the Court to uphold justice.