To The Gallows

Quite a bit of confusion about the arrest warrants out for Netanyahu, so I’ve done a little digging and will try to clear it up - not that I’ve become the sudden expert.

The war crimes and crimes against humanity allegations against Benjamin Netanyahu arise from international humanitarian law, which governs how wars must be fought, even when one side claims self-defence. These laws don’t judge whether a war itself is justified; they judge how it is conducted and whether civilians are protected.

In 2024, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) announced that he was seeking arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Israel’s defence minister, alongside warrants for Hamas leaders, over alleged crimes committed during the Gaza war. The ICC is not, in theory, a political body; it is a permanent court established to prosecute individuals for the gravest crimes under international law when domestic courts are unwilling or unable to do so.

The core allegations against Netanyahu relate to collective punishment and the deliberate deprivation of essentials needed for civilian survival in the Gaza Strip. Prosecutors argue that Israel’s military campaign included policies that cut off food, water, electricity, fuel and medical supplies to a civilian population, knowing that this would cause widespread suffering and death. Under international law, civilians may not be punished for the actions of armed groups, even if those groups operate from within civilian areas.

Another major allegation concerns disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks. International humanitarian law allows attacks on military targets, but it requires that civilian harm be proportionate to the anticipated military advantage. Prosecutors point to the scale of destruction in Gaza, the very high civilian death toll, and repeated strikes on residential buildings, refugee camps, medical facilities and aid infrastructure as evidence that this legal threshold may have been breached.

There are also allegations connected to starvation as a method of warfare. Starvation is explicitly prohibited under international law. The ICC Prosecutor argues that decisions taken at the highest political and military levels restricted humanitarian access in a way that foreseeably led to famine-like conditions, particularly affecting children, the elderly and the sick. The legal issue is not the intent to kill civilians directly, but the intent to maintain policies while knowing civilians would suffer severely as a result.

Crimes against humanity are different from war crimes but often overlap. They refer to widespread or systematic attacks against a civilian population, including murder, persecution and other inhumane acts. The allegation here is that the harm to civilians in Gaza was not incidental or isolated, but part of a broader pattern of conduct carried out over many months, affecting an entire population.

It’s important to note what these charges are not. They are not a judgement on Jewish people, on Israelis as a whole, or on the legitimacy of the state of Israel. They also do not excuse or minimise Hamas war crimes, including the killing of civilians and hostage-taking on 7 October, which the ICC Prosecutor has explicitly condemned and pursued in parallel. International law applies to all parties, regardless of cause or grievance.

The case against Netanyahu does not mean he has been found guilty. An arrest warrant, if issued by ICC judges, would mean there are reasonable grounds to believe crimes were committed and that he bears individual criminal responsibility. Like any defendant, he would be entitled to a defence and a full trial. The ICC has no police force, so enforcement depends on whether member states choose to act.

Finally, a related but separate process is unfolding at the International Court of Justice, which deals with disputes between states rather than individuals. There, Israel faces allegations of breaching the Genocide Convention. While distinct from the ICC case, the ICJ’s provisional rulings - warning of a real risk to civilians in Gaza - form part of the broader legal and factual context.

In short, the charges against Netanyahu are about whether senior political leaders can be held personally accountable when state policies lead to mass civilian suffering. They reflect a long-standing principle of international law: no leader is above the rules, even in war.