Article 5 of the Rome Statute – the founding document of the ICC – has an extended definition of what constitutes ‘serious crimes’, that being the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. It could be argued, then, that Israel should be held accountable for all of these ‘serious crimes’. Yet, the ICC opted for what is known as the ‘narrow scope’, thus the investigation will only be looking at the single component of war crimes. Why is that?
…It is surprising not to see any reference to the alleged committing of ‘crimes against humanity’, which, as victims say, is widely documented. There is no reference to the systematic attacks put in place by Israeli authorities against the civilian population in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem or in Gaza. The ‘narrow scope’, which excludes crimes against humanity, is something the Prosecutor should look back into. The overall situation in Gaza is largely ignored; there is no reference to the 14-year long siege; there is no reference to the overall victims of the Gaza war in 2014.
That said, the scope of the investigation is not binding for the future. The Prosecutor can decide, at any moment, to include other crimes. We hope it will happen because, otherwise, many victims will never get justice.
Continue reading at https://kashmirreader.com/2020/07/07/will-the-icc-investigation-bring-justice-for-palestine/
Further, we also note that Israel is also responsible for the crime of genocide against the Palestinian people. From the mass killing and displacement of Palestinians in 1948 to the devastating siege on Gaza to the annexation plan, which aims to force Palestinians from their land by depriving them not only of access to the law but also to agricultural land and water sources, Israel is responsible for a series of institutional policies and practices “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,” as defined by the Convention on the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and Article 6 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Continue reading at https://iadllaw.org/2020/07/iadl-urges-strong-international-action-to-stop-israeli-annexation-of-palestinian-land/
As the alternate formulation for the crime of aggression makes clear – with the jurisdictional provisions that for State referrals or proprio motu investigations inter alia States Parties can opt out of accepting the Court’s jurisdiction over aggression by that State Party, and that the Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over non-States Party’s nationals or territory – States knew how to limit the Court’s jurisdiction vis-à-vis non-State Party nationals if they wanted; they wanted no such limitation for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Non-member States – including those who objected to the text of article 12(2) – are also on notice that the Court is vested with jurisdiction over nationals of non-member States for conduct that occurs on the territory of a State Party…
Article 12(2) of the Statute states clearly that the Court can exercise its jurisdiction over the crimes enumerated in article 5 when there exists a “special link” with the crime. The territoriality principle is one of the most widely accepted principles of international law. The construction of article 12(2) makes clear that the exercise of the Court’s jurisdiction is not limited to either the territory of its Member States nor the nationals of such States; the ICC can exercise jurisdiction over the national of a State Party who commits a crime specified in article 5 of the Statue on the territory of a non-Member State when other preconditions are met, and likewise can exercise jurisdiction over nationals of non-Member States when they commit an article 5 crime on the territory of a Member State.
Continue reading at https://www.icc-cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2020_01171.PDF