央视新闻
当地时间11月21日，国际刑事法院（ICC）对以色列总理内塔尼亚胡和前国防部长加兰特发出逮捕令。国际刑事法院指控内塔尼亚胡和加兰特至少在2023年10月8日至2024年5月20日（即检方提出逮捕令申请之日）期间犯下危害人类罪和战争罪。国际刑事法院称，针对内塔尼亚胡和加兰特的指控包括利用饥饿作为战争工具以及谋杀、迫害和其他不人道行为 。
当天，国际刑事法院还向巴勒斯坦伊斯兰抵抗运动（哈马斯）领导人穆罕默德·迪亚卜·易卜拉欣·马斯里发出逮捕令。
以色列和哈马斯方面目前对此暂无回应。
Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I rejects the State of Israel’s challenges to jurisdiction and issues warrants of arrest for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant
Today, on 21 November 2024, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), in its composition for the Situation in the State of Palestine, unanimously issued two decisions rejecting challenges by the State of Israel (‘Israel’) brought under articles 18 and 19 of the Rome Statute (the ‘Statute’). It also issued warrants of arrest for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant.
Decisions on requests by the State of Israel
The Chamber ruled on two requests submitted by the Israel on 26 September 2024. In the first request, Israel challenged the Court’s jurisdiction over the Situation in the State of Palestine in general, and over Israeli nationals more specifically, on the basis of article 19(2) of the Statute. In the second request, Israel requested that the Chamber order the Prosecution to provide a new notification of the initiation of an investigation to its authorities under article 18(1) of the Statute. Israel also requested the Chamber to halt any proceedings before the Court in the relevant situation, including the consideration of the applications for warrants of arrest for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant, submitted by the Prosecution on 20 May 2024.
As to the first challenge, the Chamber noted that the acceptance by Israel of the Court’s jurisdiction is not required, as the Court can exercise its jurisdiction on the basis of territorial jurisdiction of Palestine, as determined by Pre-Trial Chamber I in a previous composition. Furthermore, the Chamber considered that pursuant to article 19(1) of the Statute, States are not entitled to challenge the Court’s jurisdiction under article 19(2) prior to the issuance of a warrant of arrest. Thus Israel’s challenge is premature. This is without prejudice to any future possible challenges to the Court’s jurisdiction and/or admissibility of any particular case.
Decision on Israel’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to article 19(2) of the Rome Statute
The Chamber also rejected Israel’s request under article 18(1) of the Statute. The Chamber recalled that the Prosecution notified Israel of the initiation of an investigation in 2021. At that time, despite a clarification request by the Prosecution, Israel elected not to pursue any request for deferral of the investigation. Further, the Chamber considered that the parameters of the investigation in the situation have remained the same and, as a consequence, no new notification to the State of Israel was required. In light of this, the judges found that there was no reason to halt the consideration of the applications for warrants of arrest.
Decision on Israel’s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice
Warrants of arrest
The Chamber issued warrants of arrest for two individuals, Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant, for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October 2023 until at least 20 May 2024, the day the Prosecution filed the applications for warrants of arrest.
The arrest warrants are classified as ‘secret’, in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of the investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing. Moreover, the Chamber considers it to be in the interest of victims and their families that they are made aware of the warrants’ existence.
At the outset, the Chamber considered that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant falls within the jurisdiction of the Court. The Chamber recalled that, in a previous composition, it already decided that the Court’s jurisdiction in the situation extended to Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Furthermore, the Chamber declined to use its discretionary proprio motu powers to determine the admissibility of the two cases at this stage. This is without prejudice to any determination as to the jurisdiction and admissibility of the cases at a later stage.
With regard to the crimes, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu, born on 21 October 1949, Prime Minister of Israel at the time of the relevant conduct, and Mr Gallant, born on 8 November 1958, Minister of Defence of Israel at the time of the alleged conduct, each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.
The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population.
Alleged crimes
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that during the relevant time, international humanitarian law related to international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine applied. This is because they are two High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and because Israel occupies at least parts of Palestine. The Chamber also found that the law related to non-international armed conflict applied to the fighting between Israel and Hamas. The Chamber found that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant concerned the activities of Israeli government bodies and the armed forces against the civilian population in Palestine, more specifically civilians in Gaza. It therefore concerned the relationship between two parties to an international armed conflict, as well as the relationship between an occupying power and the population in occupied territory. For these reasons, with regards to war crimes, the Chamber found it appropriate to issue the arrest warrants pursuant to the law of international armed conflict. The Chamber also found that the alleged crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza.
The Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024. This finding is based on the role of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant in impeding humanitarian aid in violation of international humanitarian law and their failure to facilitate relief by all means at its disposal. The Chamber found that their conduct led to the disruption of the ability of humanitarian organisations to provide food and other essential goods to the population in need in Gaza. The aforementioned restrictions together with cutting off electricity and reducing fuel supply also had a severe impact on the availability of water in Gaza and the ability of hospitals to provide medical care.
The Chamber also noted that decisions allowing or increasing humanitarian assistance into Gaza were often conditional. They were not made to fulfil Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law or to ensure that the civilian population in Gaza would be adequately supplied with goods in need. In fact, they were a response to the pressure of the international community or requests by the United States of America. In any event, the increases in humanitarian assistance were not sufficient to improve the population’s access to essential goods.
Furthermore, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that no clear military need or other justification under international humanitarian law could be identified for the restrictions placed on access for humanitarian relief operations. Despite warnings and appeals made by, inter alia, the UN Security Council, UN Secretary General, States, and governmental and civil society organisations about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, only minimal humanitarian assistance was authorised. In this regard, the Chamber considered the prolonged period of deprivation and Mr Netanyahu’s statement connecting the halt in the essential goods and humanitarian aid with the goals of war.
The Chamber therefore found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.
The Chamber found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and specific medical supplies, created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, which resulted in the death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration. On the basis of material presented by the Prosecution covering the period until 20 May 2024, the Chamber could not determine that all elements of the crime against humanity of extermination were met. However, the Chamber did find that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of murder was committed in relation to these victims.
In addition, by intentionally limiting or preventing medical supplies and medicine from getting into Gaza, in particular anaesthetics and anaesthesia machines, the two individuals are also responsible for inflicting great suffering by means of inhumane acts on persons in need of treatment. Doctors were forced to operate on wounded persons and carry out amputations, including on children, without anaesthetics, and/or were forced to use inadequate and unsafe means to sedate patients, causing these persons extreme pain and suffering. This amounts to the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts.
The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that the abovementioned conduct deprived a significant portion of the civilian population in Gaza of their fundamental rights, including the rights to life and health, and that the population was targeted based on political and/or national grounds. It therefore found that the crime against humanity of persecution was committed.
Finally, the Chamber assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza. In this regard, the Chamber found that the material provided by the Prosecution only allowed it to make findings on two incidents that qualified as attacks that were intentionally directed against civilians. Reasonable grounds to believe exist that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant, despite having measures available to them to prevent or repress the commission of crimes or ensure the submittal of the matter to the competent authorities, failed to do so.
Background
On 1 January 2015, The State of Palestine lodged a declaration under article 12(3) of the Rome Statute accepting jurisdiction of the Court since 13 June 2014.
On 2 January 2015, The State of Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute by depositing its instrument of accession with the UN Secretary-General. The Rome Statute entered into force for The State of Palestine on 1 April 2015.
On 22 May 2018, pursuant to articles 13(a) and 14 of the Rome Statute, The State of Palestine referred to the Prosecutor the Situation since 13 June 2014, with no end date.
On 3 March 2021, the Prosecutor announced the opening of the investigation into the Situation in the State of Palestine. This followed Pre-Trial Chamber I's decision on 5 February 2021 that the Court could exercise its criminal jurisdiction in the Situation and, by majority, that the territorial scope of this jurisdiction extends to Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.
On 17 November 2023, the Office of the Prosecutor received a further referral of the Situation in the State of Palestine, from South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, and Djibouti, and on 18 January 2024, the Republic of Chile and the United Mexican State additionally submitted a referral to the Prosecutor with respect to the situation in The State of Palestine.
Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I issues warrant of arrest for Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri (Deif)
Today, on 21 November 2024, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), in its composition for the Situation in the State of Palestine, unanimously issued a warrant of arrest for Mr Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, commonly known as ‘Deif’, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes committed on the territory of the State of Israel and the State of Palestine from at least 7 October 2023.
The Prosecution had initially filed applications for warrants of arrest for two other senior leaders of Hamas, namely Mr Ismail Haniyeh and Mr Yahya Sinwar. Following confirmation of their deaths, the Chamber granted the withdrawal of the applications on 9 August 2024 and 25 October 2024, respectively. With respect to Mr Deif, the Prosecution indicated that it would continue to gather information with respect to his reported death. On 15 November 2024, the Prosecution, referring to information from both the Israeli and Palestinian authorities, notified the Chamber that it is not in a position to determine whether Mr Deif has been killed or remains alive. Therefore, the Chamber issues the present warrant of arrest. The Prosecution also noted that it continues to investigate the crimes in the ongoing conflict and envisions that further applications for warrants of arrest will be submitted.
The warrant of arrest for Mr Deif is classified as ‘secret’ in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing, in particular the holding of a number of hostages captive. The Chamber considers it is also in the interest of victims and their families to be aware of the warrant’s existence.
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Deif, born in 1965, the highest commander of the military wing of Hamas (known as the al-Qassam Brigades) at the time of the alleged conduct, is responsible for the crimes against humanity of murder; extermination; torture; and rape and other form of sexual violence; as well as the war crimes of murder, cruel treatment, torture,; taking hostages; outrages upon personal dignity; and rape and other form of sexual violence.
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Deif bears criminal responsibility for the aforementioned crimes for (i) having committed the acts jointly and through others and (ii) having ordered or induced the commission of the crimes, and (iii) for his failure to exercise proper control over forces under his effective command and control.
The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that during the relevant time, international humanitarian law related to international armed conflict (between Israel and Palestine) and non-international armed conflict (between Israel and Hamas) applied. The Chamber also found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack directed by Hamas and other armed groups against the civilian population of Israel.
Alleged crimes
With regard to the crimes, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that on 7 October 2023, shortly after a large number of rockets triggered the ‘Tzeva Adom’ alarm in several communities in Israel around 6:20-6:30 am, armed men entered these communities, as well as the site of the Supernova festival, a music event with a few thousand participants (‘7 October Operation’). Members of Hamas, notably fighters of the al-Qassam Brigades, carried out mass killings at and/or around the communities of Kfar Aza, Holit, Nir Oz, Be’eri, and Nahal Oz, as well as at the Supernova festival. The attackers, for example, fired at people while they were seeking shelter and throw grenades at them. Hamas fighters followed similar patterns in other locations and killed further persons. These killings qualify as the crime against humanity and the war crime of murder.
The Chamber also found that in some locations, namely at the site of the Supernova festival and in the vicinity thereof, attackers fired at people with semi-automatic weapons and/or rocket-propelled grenades. In light of this, the Chamber concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against civilians was committed.
In light of the coordinated killings of members of civilians at several separate locations, the Chamber also found that the conduct took place as part of a mass killing of members of the civilian population, and it therefore concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of extermination was committed.
Furthermore, in the context of 7 October Operation, the Chamber found that a large number of persons were seized from various locations in Israel, including Kfar Aza, Holit, Nir Oz, Be’eri, Nahal Oz, and the Supernova festival. The victims were civilians, including children and elderly people, as well as members of the IDF (Israeli Defence Forces). After being taken to Gaza, most of them were detained in secret locations, including apartments and underground tunnels. A number of groups participated in seizing and detaining these persons: the al-Qassam Brigades, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad al-Quds, and other Palestinian armed groups. The Chamber found that Hamas was in control of the hostages as of the start of their detention in Gaza, irrespective of the group affiliation of the individuals initially seizing the hostages. The Chamber also found that hostage taking in the context of the 7 October Operation was conducted with the aim to negotiate their release in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. In light of the above, the Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the war crime of hostage taking was committed.
The Chamber further found that, while they were held captive in Gaza, some hostages, predominantly women, were subjected to sexual and gender based violence, including forced penetration, forced nudity, and humiliating and degrading treatment. On the basis of the material presented, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes of torture as a crime against humanity and war crime, rape and other forms of sexual violence as crimes against humanity and war crimes, cruel treatment as a war crime, and outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime were committed against these persons during the relevant period.
With respect to Mr Deif’s individual criminal responsibility, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that senior leaders of Hamas, comprising of at least Mr Deif, Mr Sinwar, and Mr Haniyeh, agreed to jointly carry out the 7 October 2023 Operation. The plan included targeting military and civilian objects in Israel and other acts of violence against Israeli persons. The material presented by the Prosecution indicated that several senior members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad al-Quds joined the plan in the morning of 7 October 2023 at the latest, and that other Palestinians armed groups participated in the Operation.
Mr Deif, in his role as the commander of the al-Qassam Brigades, and through his actions prior to, during and after the 7 October Operation, is responsible for the commission of these crimes. In addition, the Chamber considered that Mr Deif ordered or induced the crimes or is responsible as a military commander for the criminal conduct of his subordinates.
Background
On 1 January 2015, The State of Palestine lodged a declaration under article 12(3) of the Rome Statute accepting jurisdiction of the Court since 13 June 2014.
On 2 January 2015, The State of Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute by depositing its instrument of accession with the UN Secretary-General. The Rome Statute entered into force for The State of Palestine on 1 April 2015.
On 22 May 2018, pursuant to articles 13(a) and 14 of the Rome Statute, The State of Palestine referred to the Prosecutor the Situation since 13 June 2014, with no end date.
On 3 March 2021, the Prosecutor announced the opening of the investigation into the Situation in the State of Palestine. This followed Pre-Trial Chamber I's decision on 5 February 2021 that the Court could exercise its criminal jurisdiction in the Situation and, by majority, that the territorial scope of this jurisdiction extends to Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.
On 17 November 2023, the Office of the Prosecutor received a further referral of the Situation in the State of Palestine, from South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, and Djibouti, and on 18 January 2024, the Republic of Chile and the United Mexican State additionally submitted a referral to the Prosecutor with respect to the situation in The State of Palestine.
本期编辑 邢潭
重磅福利
关注“法律检索”公众号，后台回复“暑期学校”即可获取首届“大数据与法律检索”暑期学校课程PPT。回复“PPT”即可获得中国大学MOOC《大数据与法律检索》主讲人在深圳律协授课的PPT（六百多页干货）。
深圳律协培训课程《律师法律检索核心技能》B站地址（点击文后阅读原文即可观看）
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV18y4y137xu/
扫下方海报二维码即可免费学习中国大学MOOC《大数据与法律检索》第八期课程（有重要更新）
