What it is about
Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs, on behalf of the Israeli government, has rejected Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara’s demand for an immediate establishment of a state commission of inquiry. This request was aimed at preempting potential legal actions against Israel in The Hague related to its handling of the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Fuchs pointed out that the government alone has the authority to establish such a commission and indicated that the current wartime situation makes this an inappropriate time for such an investigation.
Why it matters
The proposal for a state commission of inquiry comes in response to legal challenges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC). These challenges feature severe allegations, including accusations of genocide and the purposeful deprivation of essentials to civilians in Gaza, either directly against top Israeli leaders or the state itself. As accusations mount, it is crucial for Israel to address these with a robust and clear defense. The decision not to form the inquiry immediately highlights Israel’s firm stance in navigating international pressures during active conflict.
The Big Picture
Israel is vehemently defending itself against genocide charges brought by South Africa at the ICJ, following a deadly attack led by Hamas on October 7, which resulted in the deaths of nearly 1,200 Israelis and over 250 hostages being taken. Israel maintains that its actions in Gaza are acts of legitimate self-defense. Additionally, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan has petitioned for arrest warrants against Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant under accusations of denying food and water to Gazan civilians.
Context
International law mechanisms such as the ICC intervene in national jurisdictions only if the state is found to be unable or unwilling to prosecute crimes locally. Thus, a state commission could effectively counter the arrest warrant warrants against Israeli leaders by demonstrating Israel’s ability to internally investigate wartime conduct. Fuchs’ assertion implies that the government retains ultimate control over establishing such commissions and that the courtroom might not be the most appropriate venue while hostilities continue.
What’s Next
While Attorney General Baharav-Miara emphasizes urgency from an international legal perspective believes that a swift establishment of the inquiry could aid in mitigating threats to top Israeli officials. Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Cabinet might wait until a less critical time, suggesting that only an investigation into specific humanitarian policies held merit for immediate discussion. The situation remains fluid, with stakes remarkably high both on the battleground and in the courtroom.
Conclusion
The Israeli government faces complex decisions balancing immediate war efforts and long-term strategic legal defenses. By deferring the creation of a full state commission of inquiry, Israel signals resolve against unverified external pressures, focusing instead on maintaining wartime strategies while simultaneously preparing to respond to international legal challenges effectively when the timing is better suited. This ensures that the narrative of legitimate self-defense remains front and center amidst ongoing operations against Hamas.
This story was first published on timesofisrael.com.