A leading Australian legal expert has called for the nation to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), claiming the institution is failing to uphold the principles of justice it was designed to protect. This call comes in the wake of the ICC’s contentious decision to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant, accusing them of crimes against humanity and war crimes during the Gaza conflict ignited by Hamas’ October 7 attacks.

 

Professor Greg Rose from Wollongong University has raised significant concerns about the court’s actions, suggesting that its recent decisions undermine the rule of law and compromise its credibility on the global stage. Speaking to Sky News Australia’s Chris Kenny, Rose stated, “It’s my firm belief that the court is undermining the rule of law, the integrity of the United Nations, and the court’s credibility. In fact, it’s shot, and the best thing that Australia could do would be to pull out.”

 

Rose’s critique focuses heavily on jurisdictional overreach, pointing out that Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the ICC. This, he argues, means the court lacks the authority to prosecute Israeli leaders. “The fact that the ICC brought a case against Israel despite it not being bound by the court shows it has exceeded its own jurisdiction,” Rose said.

 

Additionally, Rose criticized the ICC for failing to adhere to principles of due process and procedural fairness enshrined in its statute. He highlighted the court’s disregard for findings by an independent delegation of military experts, which deemed Israel’s domestic investigations adequate. “The court is meant to defer to the domestic processes of the country alleged to have committed the crimes,” he explained. “And then we also have breaches of procedural fairness with the inversion of the burden of proof.”

 

Rose was particularly scathing about the ICC’s evidentiary approach. “The way the court has formulated its issue of warrants requires Israel to prove innocence. It requires Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant to demonstrate that they had no criminal intention… rather than the court finding on the evidence that they had a criminal intention,” he said, adding, “In fact, the court’s substantive judgment is two pages. And it’s really a sad joke.”

 

The involvement of one of the three judges, who had previously worked on prosecuting the case, further fueled accusations of bias. Rose noted, “Normally, if you have a judge working on a case [as a prosecutor] and then going to judge it… that would be needed to give a reasonable apprehension of bias.”

 

Rose’s remarks align with recent statements from Australian political figures. Shadow Attorney General Michaelia Cash hinted at the possibility of a future Coalition government reassessing Australia’s relationship with the ICC. Speaking on Sky News Australia’s Sunday Agenda, she stated, “Given the actions of the ICC, we certainly do have grounds now to reconsider our membership of the organisation.”

 

This renewed scrutiny of the ICC raises questions about its role and relevance in international law, with Australia potentially at a crossroads regarding its continued participation in the court.

 

Based on a report by Sky News 2024-11-28

 

 

 

So, not the International Cricket Council, then. 

A couple of troll posts removed, one was a blatant Israeli hate speech post @thaibeachlovers

I doubt the current mob in government would put their hands up to any suggestions of siding with the Israelis.

The weak gutted turds might upset the Muslim voters.

If he is correct, that would be an argument for the defense. His opinion seems to be more political than legal.

He's not the only one expressing outrage at Australia's stance. Of course the pro Hamas supporters will ignore him and the OP

 

Australia urged to take a stand on Israel

Australia’s longest-serving foreign minister, Alexander Downer, says the Albanese government risks handing a propaganda win to terrorists by not rejecting an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister, as Australia remained one of only a few countries not to declare its position.

“This is a propaganda win for Hamas, for Hezbollah, for Iran and their fellow travellers. It has destroyed the credibility of the ICC,” he said.

Mr Downer said Australia should make clear it would not arrest Mr Netanyahu should he visit the country. 

https://www.afr.com/world/middle-east/australia-urged-to-take-a-stand-on-israel-20241124-p5kt2n

The Australian Labor Government is a full on member of the progressive woke left. Their position in power is looking very much like that of the Dems in the US. No way will they rethink their ICC membership. As @sherwood they don't want to upset the Muslim voters but I would add to that free Palestine mob which of course are not all Arab or Muslim but are progressive idiots.

Time to retire Professor Rose. 

There's plenty of evidence war crimes are being committed.

 

That doesn't mean Netanyahu is guilty of them, to prove that you would have to prove Israel's response (under his leadership) is not proportional.

21 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

There's plenty of evidence war crimes are being committed.

 

That doesn't mean Netanyahu is guilty of them, to prove that you would have to prove Israel's response (under his leadership) is not proportional.

 

   There isn't any evidence that war crimes are being committed by Israel , the only evidence of any war crimes are those committed by Hamsn

Best not to have joined the ICC in the first place but, having done so, either withdraw or ignore.

15 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   There isn't any evidence that war crimes are being committed by Israel , the only evidence of any war crimes are those committed by Hamsn

 

There are well documented war crimes being committed by Israeli soldiers, most recently with drones killing injured children, there are multiple eye-witness accounts.

 

To prove Netanyahu is guilty of war crimes you have to either prove he ordered war crimes directly, or that Israel's response is not proportional.  The former is impossible, the latter is down to a jury to decide.

Plenty of keyboard warriors on government benefits here taking stance against the government. There are nearly 2 billion Muslims in various countries, to which Australia exports goods. The earnings from these exports help to pay your OAP. We can't afford to piss off Indonesia, the biggest Muslim country and our closest neighbour. Australia has no stake in the middle east conflicts,  we only get refugees from there.

Good to have a country where international criminals can hide.

Netanyahu is free to visit his criminal buddies in US already. And now AUS? 

6 hours ago, Social Media said:

Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the ICC.

Really? So not joining would be giving license to any sort of crime against humanity... The Nuremberg trials of Nazis after WW2.... gee, would they have been let go if they said "Sorry, we didn't sign on to trials of us for the horrible things we did: you must let us go."

3 hours ago, dinsdale said:

The Australian Labor Government is a full on member of the progressive woke left.

It must be very confusing for the right.

the extreme right has always embraced naziism and a hatred of Jews.

But now they seem to be behind the Jews in the current conflict. 
Fickle.

47 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

There are well documented war crimes being committed by Israeli soldiers, most recently with drones killing injured children, there are multiple eye-witness accounts.

 

To prove Netanyahu is guilty of war crimes you have to either prove he ordered war crimes directly, or that Israel's response is not proportional.  The former is impossible, the latter is down to a jury to decide.

No there are NOT well documented war crimes being committed. There may well be allegations however whatever you claim on alleged documented war crimes is totally irrelevant to the ICC arrest warrants that have been issued that do not contain those allegations. Perhaps do a little research and see what the actual charges are.

 

Further, the ICC does not have a jury when hearing cases so your legal comments on finding guilt or innocence are also faulty.

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

No there are NOT well documented war crimes being committed. There may well be allegations however whatever you claim on alleged documented war crimes is totally irrelevant to the ICC arrest warrants that have been issued that do not contain those allegations. Perhaps do a little research and see what the actual charges are.

 

Further, the ICC does not have a jury when hearing cases so your legal comments on finding guilt or innocence are also faulty.

 

I was quite clear about the well documented war crimes committed by Israeli soldiers not likely being Netanyahu's responsibility and the test that would be applied to Netanyahu.

 

The crimes I specifically mentioned, are well documented ...

Israel uses sniper drones in Gaza, eyewitnesses say : NPR

Gaza surgeon describes drones targeting children

 

Yes these crimes are indeed well documented, they are allegations and remain so until proven.

 

Before you say it, I am not anti-semitic. don't be tempted to bring religion or race into this.

 

The ICC uses a panel of judges as its jury, however you may prefer to spin it, it's a jury nonetheless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just now, JBChiangRai said:

 

I was quite clear about the well documented war crimes committed by Israeli soldiers not likely being Netanyahu's responsibility and the test that would be applied to Netanyahu.

 

The crimes I specifically mentioned, are well documented ...

Israel uses sniper drones in Gaza, eyewitnesses say : NPR

Gaza surgeon describes drones targeting children

 

Yes these crimes are indeed well documented, they are allegations and remain so until proven.

 

Before you say it, I am not anti-semitic. don't be tempted to bring religion or race into this.

 

The ICC uses a panel of judges as its jury, however you may prefer to spin it, it's a jury nonetheless.

As I said, totally irrelevant to the actual arrest warrants issued and what they contain and no I was spinning nothing, there is no jury in an ICC trial. That is the fact. The spin is you saying its a jury nonetheless.

1 hour ago, newbee2022 said:

Good to have a country where international criminals can hide.

Netanyahu is free to visit his criminal buddies in US already. And now AUS? 

Australia is, regrettably, just another lapdog of USA. None of the 'lapdog countries' ever commented on the "Drone Papers" (feel free to Google it). Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that USA won't give a 'flying fish' about Netanyahu's evil acts.

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

Best not to have joined the ICC in the first place but, having done so, either withdraw or ignore.

Are you saying that countries can ignore the law? If so they can't complain if citizens do likewise.

Israelis don't defend yourself against tablecloth wearing bloodthirsty killers of the innocent, or we'll issue a war criminal warrant against you.

6 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Israelis don't defend yourself against tablecloth wearing bloodthirsty killers of the innocent, or we'll issue a war criminal warrant against you.

 

Proportional response is absolutely warranted.

1 hour ago, MalcolmB said:

It must be very confusing for the right.

the extreme right has always embraced naziism and a hatred of Jews.

But now they seem to be behind the Jews in the current conflict. 
Fickle.

Almost as confusing as your hatred against jews and ya know, not the people who have taken over your country

3 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

Proportional response is absolutely warranted.

Tsahal's response was proportionate, the collaterals are due to Hamas' human shield defences.

30 minutes ago, mdr224 said:

Almost as confusing as your hatred against jews and ya know, not the people who have taken over your country

Are you a Native American or one of those who took over America?

30 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Tsahal's response was proportionate, the collaterals are due to Hamas' human shield defences.

 

You are entitled & I appreciate your opinion, I do however disagree with it.

46 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Are you saying that countries can ignore the law? If so they can't complain if citizens do likewise.

No that's you saying it. The law needs to be clear in the first place and currently the legalities of how they went about getting the warrants and whether they are even legal remain unclear.

 

France says 'immunities apply' to Netanyahu regarding ICC arrest warrant
In a statement, the foreign ministry said France would 'respect its international obligations' but added that the Israeli leader was covered by immunity rules that apply to states that are not a party to the ICC.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/11/27/france-says-immunities-apply-to-netanyahu-regarding-icc-arrest-warrant_6734304_4.html

 

Italy says clarity needed on ICC arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant

Italy said on Tuesday it was ready to respect its obligations concerning the International Criminal Court’s warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant, but that clarity was needed on how it would work in Netanyahu’s case.

“We always apply the obligations but we have to understand what the obligations are,” Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani told a news conference on Tuesday, saying it was not clear whether high state officials enjoyed immunity from prosecution.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/italy-says-clarity-needed-on-icc-arrest-warrants-for-netanyahu-gallant/

 

And as it has every right to do in the circumstances in which these warrants were issued:

 

Israel to appeal against ICC warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm273g1jm51o

 

But you go ahead and hang em high, we all know where you stand already

 

39 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

Are you a Native American or one of those who took over America?

What kind of logic is that! Its like youve accepted that arabic will be englands first language in a few decades

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Are you saying that countries can ignore the law? If so they can't complain if citizens do likewise.

Depends on how the word 'law' is defined in this context.