The Hamas movement

“Horrible and totally unattainable.” In these phrases marked Prime Minister Petr Fiala (ODS) Monday’s proposal by the Chief Prosecutor of the Worldwide Felony Court docket (ICC) Karim Khan for an extension arrest warrants to Israeli officers, together with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Khan did so on the similar time and introduced that he was searching for an arrest warrant for the chief of the Palestinian terrorist motion Hamas, Yahya Sinvar, who was the mastermind of the October 7 bloodbath.

Representatives from the US, Italy and Britain have expressed help for Israel since Monday, like Fiala. France took the alternative place. However the wave of feelings from the general public didn’t escape both.

What do the newest developments actually imply?

“This isn’t a comparability,” defined Veronika Bílková, professor of worldwide legislation, to Seznam Zprávy. “The prosecutor solely says there’s a cheap suspicion that officers on the Hamas and Israeli aspect might have dedicated crimes in opposition to humanity and battle crimes.”

The knowledgeable, who works on the College of Regulation at Charles College and as an analyst on the Institute of Worldwide Relations, additionally explains within the interview what it might imply for high-ranking officers to deliver a- enter such arrest warrants.

Prosecutor Khan’s announcement on Monday stirred up feelings and, in line with some, primarily places the actions of Hamas and Israel on the identical degree. How ought to we actually learn this occasion?

Within the first stage, the prosecutor – and later the Worldwide Felony Court docket – all the time focuses on the so-called scenario. By scenario is supposed the state of affairs in a sure nation, and on this case the state of affairs in Palestine. Throughout the specified circumstances, the prosecutor then investigates any crimes that will fall below the jurisdiction of the Worldwide Felony Court docket.

From this attitude, the prosecutor’s determination to deal with each the alleged crimes of Hamas and the alleged crimes of Israel at this stage is neither shocking nor distinctive.

On the similar time, there’s a second ingredient, which can also be indicated within the assertion of the prosecutor Khan. In it, he strongly emphasizes the necessity to sign that worldwide legislation applies to everybody. After all, he didn’t wish to separate these circumstances as a result of he wouldn’t give the impression that worldwide legislation solely utilized to at least one aspect of the battle.

So, should not we see the occasion – by way of worldwide legislation – via the lens of those that argue that the given circumstances can’t be in contrast?

This isn’t a comparability. The prosecutor says solely that there’s cheap suspicion that each Hamas and Israeli officers might have dedicated crimes in opposition to humanity and battle crimes. However the catalog of those crimes is altering; for Hamas, crimes are primarily associated to the bloodbath of October 7 final yr and the holding of hostages. So far as Israel is anxious, the crimes are significantly associated to the conduct of the armed battle within the Gaza Strip.

How doubtless is it that Khan will succeed along with his proposal?

After all, that is troublesome to measure. Nevertheless, the usual is that if the prosecution presents one thing, it should be properly reasoned. Subsequently, it isn’t customary for the pre-trial panel to reject any suggestion of the prosecutor.

On this explicit case, the prosecutor needed to ensure, so, along with the investigation of his workplace, he created a gaggle of impartial consultants. Its members are largely legal professionals (both from the educational group or from apply) from Anglo-Saxon international locations, primarily from Nice Britain and the USA.

This group of eight legal professionals ready a parallel report, which can also be out there now, wherein they reached the identical conclusions because the prosecutor. The place of the prosecutor is now very sturdy, and the pretrial chamber must have very primary causes to determine to not challenge an arrest warrant both in relation to the Hamas politicians or within the case of Israeli politicians.

Is not the creation of such a physique a typical apply in different circumstances as properly?

No, it isn’t quite common.

In the meanwhile, these arrest warrants are mainly being mentioned collectively. However how will or not it’s in actuality? Will there be a cut up?

As I’ve already mentioned, the Worldwide Felony Court docket all the time offers with particular conditions. Inside them, there are so-called circumstances, normally some particular circumstances, such because the kidnapping of hostages, in addition to particular accused individuals.

It is extremely apparent right here that though we’re speaking about one scenario, ie the occasions in Palestine, we’re at the very least speaking about two completely different points. One among them pertains to the October 7 bloodbath and subsequent hostilities, wherein Hamas politicians are accused. The second is expounded to the army operation within the Gaza Strip and the crimes dedicated inside it, which Israeli politicians are going to be accused of.

The pre-trial panel might determine to challenge the arrest warrant in a single minute. Nevertheless, since these are completely different circumstances, there is no such thing as a doubt that the proceedings themselves will run individually, as a result of the person proof may also be completely different.

What can be the authorized penalties if arrest warrants might be issued for figures as excessive as Sinvar and Netanyahu?

Individuals who get an arrest warrant normally have two choices. Both they voluntarily go to the Hague and face expenses, which has occurred up to now, superb because it appears. After all, we can’t count on an excessive amount of that somebody from a non-treaty celebration, ie from Israel, would behave on this method. And we in all probability cannot count on Hamas politicians to behave that method both.

Nevertheless, if this doesn’t occur, the arrest warrant is legitimate. All states which can be events to the Rome Statute, at present 124 states, together with the Czech Republic and Palestine, are obliged to detain such an accused individual, of their have it on their land, and hand it over to the ICC for prosecution. .

We already know from the previous that this doesn’t all the time occur. For instance, former Sudanese president Umar al-Bashir, who was additionally granted an arrest warrant, traveled to a number of international locations and was not extradited to The Hague. In the meanwhile, it’s a political query, whether or not or not the given states might be keen to behave.

Nevertheless, if they don’t achieve this, they’re in breach of their obligations below worldwide legislation.

Contemplating what we’ve seen thus far relating to Netanyahu by way of statements each on the earth and from Czech politicians, is not worldwide legislation on this regard a bit bit in jeopardy? Aren’t we pressured to interrupt due to our beliefs?

I do not wish to guess that. After all, it might rely on how the Israeli aspect would react. States are normally extra cautious themselves, which we are able to see now, for instance, within the case of Russian President Vladimir Putin, for whom an arrest warrant has already been issued. He’s very cautious and mainly solely travels to international locations that aren’t events to the Rome Statute.