Timeline of Deception @IntlCrimCourt (ICC)
On 3/12/2023, following a visit to Israel, the ICC Prosecutor stated “I also stand ready to engage with relevant national authorities in line with the principle of complementarity at the heart of the Rome Statute.”
On 3/12/2023, following a visit to Israel, the ICC Prosecutor stated “I also stand ready to engage with relevant national authorities in line with the principle of complementarity at the heart of the Rome Statute.”
Israeli authorities arranged a further visit to Israel to start on 27/5/2024. ICC & Israeli officials were due to meet in Jerusalem on 20/5/2024 to finalise arrangements.
But on 20/5/2024, the Prosecutor abruptly announced in a pre-prepared statement that he was filing applications for arrest warrants. The meetings in Israel were cancelled without notice.
In this statement the Prosecutor relied on allegations of famine in the north of the Gaza Strip in reports published on 18/3/2024 and cited by the UN Secretary General.
These reports were wrong. Israeli experts and officials were preparing responses showing how wrong they were. But they wanted to make sure they got everything right and peer-approved.
Had they known the Prosecutor was about to apply for arrest warrants based on the false reports they might well have published their analyses earlier.
The Israeli experts released a Working Paper on 24/5/2024 and the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a separate critique on 29/5/2024, both showing that the reports of 18/3/2024 were wrong.
On 4/6/2024 the Famine Review Committee published a review which concluded that the March reports were indeed “implausible” and had overlooked or ignored a substantial part of the food resources transferred to the north of the Gaza Strip.
If Israeli officials had not been misled by the Prosecutor that he would engage with them, the 18/3/2024 reports would probably have been debunked before the Prosecutor applied for arrest warrants on 20/5/2024.
Instead, the applications were filed without correcting the misinformation in the 18/3/2024 reports. The Prosecutor did not update the applications when these reports were debunked and insisted that the Court must rule on the applications as filed.
The Prosecutor also declined to correct other false allegations set out at , which showed that every allegation in his statement of 20/5/2024 was false.uklfi.com/wp-content/upl…
On 21/11/2024 the Court announced its decision on the applications, apparently on the basis of the uncorrected applications filed on 20/5/2024, i.e. on the basis of information which was false and which the Prosecutor knew was false.
As for the judges, “eyes they have, but they see not. They have ears, but they hear not; noses have they, but they smell not”.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
