The #ICC Appeals Chamber has decided #Israel's two appeals in the #Palestine situation. In terms of Article 18, the AC, by majority, dismissed the appeal as inadmissible. It thus did not consider the substance of Israel's argument that a new Art. 18 notification is required. - ThreadSky

About ThreadSky

kevinjonheller.bsky.social • 5 days ago

The #ICC Appeals Chamber has decided #Israel's two appeals in the #Palestine situation. In terms of Article 18, the AC, by majority, dismissed the appeal as inadmissible. It thus did not consider the substance of Israel's argument that a new Art. 18 notification is required.

Comments

kevinjonheller.bsky.social•5 days ago

In terms of Article 19, the Appeals Chamber has reversed the Pre-Trial Chamber and instructed it to consider the substance of Israel's challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court.

kevinjonheller.bsky.social•5 days ago

Neither decision has a significant affect on the Palestine investigation. Most importantly, the arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant remain valid and states parties are still obligated to enforce them.

kevinjonheller.bsky.social•5 days ago

The Pre-Trial Chamber will now decide whether to grant Israel leave to appeal its rejection of Israel's argument the OTP is required to issue a new Art. 18 notification. If it does, the Appeals Chamber will consider the argument. If it doesn't, that issue will no longer be live.

kevinjonheller.bsky.social•5 days ago

The Art. 19 decision is an insignificant win for Israel. Basically the Appeals Chamber says the Pre-Trial Chamber should have considered more directly Israel's argument that Art. 19(2)(c) permitted it to challenge the Court's jurisdiction prior to arrest warrants being issued.

kevinjonheller.bsky.social•5 days ago

Because arrest warrants have been issued, there is now no reason for the Pre-Trial Chamber not to consider Israel's jurisdictional challenge. The Appeals Chamber has thus instructed the Pre-Trial Chamber to do precisely that.

kevinjonheller.bsky.social•5 days ago

Both Netanyahu and Gallant have had the right to challenge jurisdiction since the arrest warrants were issued. So the effect of the appeal is simply to let Israel challenge jurisdiction on their behalf -- which has no practical importance, given that Netanyahu is Israel's head of state.

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply