In an unpredecented move, the governments of Mexico and Chile have jointly called on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate potential crimes taking place in Gaza amidst the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict. A statement was released by the two nations, urging the ICC to step in, given the mounting violence towards civilians since the onset of Hamas’s attacks on October 7. They indicated the necessity for ICC involvement, pointing to Palestine’s inability to maintain a robust system of justice owing to the destructive war.
Welcoming these calls for ICC involvement, the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates expressed their hopes for justice against crimes allegedly committed by Israeli officials. This referral to the ICC comes after the court’s Chief Prosecutor, Karim A.A. Khan, made a historically significant visit to Israel and Palestine last year, during which he emphasised his readiness to work with ICC member and non-member states to seek accountability.
Importantly, it should be noted that this is not the first time the Israel-Palestine conflict has been referred to the ICC. Palestine, which formally became a member of the ICC in April 2015, submitted evidence in the same year asserting that Israel had committed war crimes against it. Consequently, the ICC commenced an investigation into these allegations in 2021, to which Israel responded by rejecting the ICC’s authority to undertake such an investigation.
On another related but distinctive front, South Africa recently submitted a charge of genocide against Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over its treatment of the Palestinian people. Unlike the ICC, the ICJ operates under the United Nations (UN) and allows countries to present complaints against each other. Both South Africa and Israel have made oral submissions before the ICJ, which is still to decide whether to intervene in the conflict.
The merits of these cases remain significantly important as they test the ability of international institutions to intervene and adjudicate in conflicts that have massive human rights implications. With the fate of thousands of civilians in the balance, the outcome of these cases sets a profound precedent. This report was initially published at JURIST – News.