By Jones Gadama
In a significant development, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Appeals Chamber has ordered a lower court to re-examine Israel’s arguments disputing the court’s jurisdiction over the country.
This decision is a major legal victory for Israel, marking a turning point in its battle with the ICC.
The controversy began in November 2024 when the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged “crimes against humanity and war crimes” committed during the Gaza War.
Israel vehemently rejected these allegations, arguing that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over its citizens since it is not a party to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC.
The Appeals Chamber’s ruling, handed down on April 24, 2025, unanimously agreed that the Pre-Trial Chamber erred in dismissing Israel’s jurisdictional objections as premature.
The Appeals Chamber instructed the lower court to reconsider Israel’s arguments, citing Article 19(2)(c) of the Rome Statute, which permits states to challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar welcomed the decision, stating that the ICC “has no jurisdiction over Israel” and that the warrants were “issued unlawfully” and are “null and void”. Sa’ar emphasized that Israel’s position has always been that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over its citizens.
The Appeals Chamber’s decision freezes the enforcement of the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, pending the outcome of the jurisdictional review.
This development may significantly impact the trajectory of the case, potentially halting the momentum behind attempts to criminalize Israel’s leaders for prosecuting the war in Gaza.
Israeli UN Ambassador Danny Danon praised the decision, saying it “exposes the lack of legitimacy behind the political arrest warrants”. Danon added that international institutions punishing democracies while ignoring terrorism harm not only Israel but also the values of the free world.
The Israeli government has consistently argued that the ICC’s jurisdiction does not extend to its citizens.
In response to the Appeals Chamber’s decision, a senior aide to the Prime Minister stated that Israel expects the ICC to cancel the warrants immediately, highlighting the injustice done to Netanyahu and Gallant.
The international community remains divided on the issue, with some countries supporting Israel’s position and others backing the ICC’s decision. Human Rights Watch welcomed the ICC’s decision to seek arrest warrants, emphasizing the need to hold those responsible for abuses accountable.
The case will now be remanded to the Pre-Trial Chamber for a ruling on Israel’s challenge to the court’s jurisdiction. The outcome of this review will have significant implications for Israel and the ICC.
If the court determines that it lacks jurisdiction over Israel, the arrest warrants will be invalidated. However, if the court asserts its jurisdiction, the case against Netanyahu and Gallant will proceed.
The Appeals Chamber’s decision marks a crucial turning point in this legal saga, with profound implications for Israel and international criminal law. As the case unfolds, one thing is certain – the outcome will have far-reaching consequences for Israel, the ICC, and the global community.
