The warrants, announced after months of investigation, cite alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the fighting that followed the Hamas-led attacks in Israel. ICC judges found reasonable grounds to believe that the three men bear responsibility for conduct falling within the Court’s mandate
ICC issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas commander Deif
The Hague. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former defence minister Yoav Gallant and senior Hamas commander Mohammed Deif, a dramatic step that has drawn intense global scrutiny and renewed debate over accountability in the Gaza conflict.
The warrants, announced after months of investigation, cite alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the fighting that followed the Hamas-led attacks in Israel. ICC judges found reasonable grounds to believe that the three men bear responsibility for conduct falling within the Court’s mandate.
Under the Rome Statute, the ICC can prosecute only when national judicial systems fail to conduct genuine investigations or prosecutions into alleged offences. ICC spokesperson Fadi El Abdallah explained that the Court intervenes when states are “not active in relation to crimes or alleged crimes,” adding that both states and suspects may challenge the admissibility of a case if they can demonstrate credible domestic proceedings on the same issues.
If any of the three suspects appear before the Court, they will be afforded full defence rights, including legal representation and a confirmation of charges hearing to determine whether evidence is sufficient for trial. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and may appeal any final decision before the ICC Appeals Chamber.
The issuance of the warrants is symbolically significant. Established in 2002 as the world’s first permanent tribunal to prosecute genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression, the ICC was designed to uphold the rule of law where national systems fail. While independent from the United Nations, the Court works closely with the organisation.
However, enforcement remains uncertain. The ICC has no police force and depends on its 124 member states to detain suspects. In principle, if Netanyahu, Gallant or Deif enter the territory of any state party, they must be arrested and transferred to the ICC’s detention facility in the Netherlands.
Netanyahu’s recent travels have largely avoided ICC member states, though he visited the UK last year. A UK government spokesperson declined to comment on whether he would be detained if he returned, noting only that ministers would not speculate on hypothetical scenarios. Italy and the Netherlands have stated explicitly that they would carry out arrests. Other European states have affirmed their obligations under the ICC framework without specifying their approach.
Past cases show that compliance is not guaranteed. Russian President Vladimir Putin visited Mongolia—an ICC member—without arrest, and South Africa failed to detain then-Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir in 2015 despite an active warrant.
The decision has triggered heated reactions. Netanyahu said it marked a “dark day in the history of humanity,” describing the move as antisemitic and accusing the Court of undermining Israel’s right to self-defence. Gallant criticised the decision for placing Israel and Hamas “in the same row” and warned that it legitimises atrocities committed by militants.
Hamas welcomed the warrants against the Israeli leaders, calling the move an “important historical precedent,” although it avoided mention of the warrant issued for Deif. The Palestinian Authority said the Court’s decision rekindled hope in international justice and urged states to halt engagements with the Israeli officials.
In Gaza, residents expressed cautious hope that the warrants could pave the way for accountability. Munira al-Shami, who lost her sister in an airstrike, said the decision “may ease some of my pain,” though she insisted that true justice would come only if those responsible are brought before the Court.
Israel continues to reject allegations of genocide in Gaza, which are being addressed separately by the International Court of Justice.
While the prospects of arrest remain uncertain, the ICC’s decision marks one of its most consequential interventions to date, sharpening the focus on international criminal justice amid a conflict that has reverberated far beyond the region.
