Experts slam ICC for quick case against Israel while ignoring brutal regimes: ‘Totally politically driven’

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is facing criticism from experts who condemn its quick action against Israel while seemingly neglecting brutal regimes. Critics argue that this behavior by the court suggests a politically driven agenda rather than an unbiased pursuit of justice. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been ongoing for decades, with both sides accused of committing war crimes. Recently, the ICC prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, declared that the court has jurisdiction to investigate potential war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories. This move has been seen by some as targeting Israel while other atrocities around the world are being ignored. Critics point to ongoing violence by various regimes globally that have resulted in a horrifying number of victims. In contrast, these critics claim, the ICC has been relatively inactive in pursuing cases against such regimes, sparking accusations of the court being politically biased. In defense, the ICC has historically stated that its role is to serve as a court of last resort, stepping in only when national judicial systems are unable or unwilling to prosecute alleged crimes. The court asserts that it operates independently and impartially. However, critics say the speed at which the ICC has taken up the investigation against Israel compared to other cases reflects a politically driven agenda, leading to a rupture in the image of the ICC as an impartial legal institution.