Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If the country itself has a justice system that can prosecute the individual, the ICC has no jurisdiction.

In the case of Israel the ICC used a loophole to work around this, since the Israeli courts are actually able to prosecute Netanyahu (and are currently doing so on other matters).





Whether Israeli courts are able and willing to prosecute Israeli war crimes is... up for debate.

Regardless, the international law is that they are supposed to be given a chance to do so, which they weren’t.

Israel was given notice of an investigation being opened as was required when the investigation was first opened many years ago.

So far, Israel has not provided any sort of proof that they have initiated a serious independent criminal investigation into the alleged misconduct. If they did, i suspect the warrant would go away.


Find me another case of “justice” where the prosecution started before the crimes being prosecuted were allegedly committed.

The prosecution hasn't even started yet. The prosecution doesn't start until the alleged perpretators are either captured or turn themselves in (neither of which is likely to happen). Neither an investigation nor a warrant is the same thing as a trial. No evidence has been publicly presented yet, nobody has been found guilty.

Almost no other justice systems require notice that a mere investigation has been opened. So to answer your question, basically all of them.


All investigations start before the crimes they will eventually find are committed?

I would say notifications of investigations are almost never given after the crime is committed, is vaccously true because literally nobody other than the ICC does the notice thing.

In almost every other system, investigations are kept secret. The complementary thing is pretty exclusive to the ICC.

I would also say that this is a matter of politics not justice, since such investigation notices are not addressed to the accused and in general it is expected that the accused is not told that they are the subject of an investigation. As such even if the notice was handled incorrectly, it wouldn't impinge on any of the accused rights and hence not be an issue of "justice"


You expect the Israeli courts to have started an investigation on crimes that had not yet been committed.

No, but at this point the alleged crimes were allegedly comitted (or started to be comitted. The ICC prosecutor would presumably argue that some of the alleged crimes are ongoing or at least were up until the ceasefire) years ago. At best, that argument might have worked when the warrants were first announced, but its been years now. There has been more then enough time to start an investigation. If they were serious about it, they can still start one tomorrow.

The charges made are for crimes allegedly committed after the “investigation” was started.

This indicates that the prosecutor was on a witch-hunt.

Perhaps the Israeli courts, who are independent of the Netanyahu government, have not initiated proceedings because they don’t believe there’s a valid case to be made.


How long should they wait, do you think, so that they are given a fair chance?

Israel did not and doesn't appear to be planning to prosecute Netanyahu for crimes against humanity, just for corruption.

It's been over a year now, with no prosecution having started on the Isreali side.

Don't you think that counts as a chance that wasn't taken?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: