ICC should prove critics wrong by dealing with Israel fearlessly

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. [AFP]

As Israel continues to disregard the ruling of the International Court of Justice regarding its commission of genocide in Gaza, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is contemplating indicting senior Israeli government officials for the same crime.

This is a welcome move as, since its inception, the ICC has primarily targeted African nations and leaders in its indictments. In fact, until recently, the ICC has appeared to be quite biased in who it chooses to prosecute, focusing on the crimes committed in certain regions whilst completely ignoring the same atrocities elsewhere.

In spite of this little bit of progress, it is questionable whether the ICC will be able to proceed in this vein. The very inception of the court came with heavy influence from the powers that be in the West. As the Rome Statute was being written, legal representation was dominated by European and North American influence. Additionally, the United States is ostensibly exempt from being brought before the court.

 In 2002, the United States passed a law commonly referred to as The Hague Invasion Act, which gives it the unilateral right to invade The Hague should an American be indicted by the ICC. And now Israel, being in league with the United States, is seemingly protected as well.

Regarding the current Israel-Palestine conflict, the United States has demanded that Israel not be prosecuted for the crimes it is committing, hinting at the fact that the Hague Invasion Act could be triggered in defence of Israel. International law seems to be held at the behest of Uncle Sam.

It is telling that even compassionate Zionists, whilst asserting their right to defend the State of Israel, are able to point out the excesses of the Israeli government in general, and Netanyahu in particular. The ICC must also show honesty and bravery as it investigates the crimes being committed in Gaza. It would be unfair to the rest of the world to witness the ICC backing down and continuing to maintain its focus only on countries that cannot retaliate against it for exercising its mandate.

As well, this would be proof that international law does not function as a fair arbiter for all; the fact that the International Court of Justice has been wholly ignored has already pointed towards this fact, and the ICC dropping this case would be further proof. Already, the United States managed to avert the eyes of the court from investigating possible war crimes committed by American troops in Afghanistan by threatening to invade The Hague. Dropping the investigation on the genocide and war crimes committed by Israel would be the final nail in the coffin, confirming the bias of the ICC once and for all.

States also need to consider a reworking of international law or else explore alternative actions should they feel that they are unable to change the current state of affairs. As the general population continues to hold protests against this genocide across the globe, their governments also need to take a moral stand on this matter.

Already, Bolivia has severed all diplomatic ties with Israel, and a few other countries including Chile, South Africa and Chad have recalled their ambassadors from Israel. As a show of solidarity with the people of Palestine, more states ought to take up this charge as well as consider more severe punitive measures to send the message to Israel that this war is unwarranted.

Kenya, whilst remaining fairly neutral and sometimes voting in favour of Israel at the United Nations General Assembly, has shown some bravery in voting against the United States and Israel and demanding a ceasefire. This is an excellent start, but still more ought to be done to send a message to Israel that we do not support the ongoing genocide.

Whilst the consequences of cutting off diplomatic ties with Israel may be huge, it is at this point a necessary measure that would set the ball rolling. South Africa is an excellent example of how international pressure through cutting diplomatic ties and placing sanctions can bring about positive change.

 -Ms Gitahi is an international lawyer