The problem: the ICC intends to open a criminal investigation against Israeli soldiers and officials

Encouraged by the UN General Assembly’s resolution to accept the Palestinian Authority (PA) as “Non-member observer state”, the PA has turned to the International Criminal Court (ICC), in request to launch a criminal investigation against Israel for committing “War Crimes”. Last December, after five years of a “preliminary examination”, the ICC prosecutor declared her intention to open a criminal investigation, focusing on the Israeli Settlements and IDF conduct during the 2014 “Operation Protective Edge” and the Gaza border riots. The prosecutor made her decision subject to a court’s ruling, affirming that the PA is indeed a “state”, and also requested the court to rule that the territory of “the State of Palestine” compromises all pre-1967 borders, including the Holly City of Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Stip.

The danger: IDF soldiers and Israeli officials under investigation and devastating effects on Israel

An ICC criminal investigation, followed by possible criminal charges against Israelis in the ICC, will carry devastating effects on the state of Israel.  These effects, stretching from the immediate personal risk for individuals, whose only blame is for serving their country and fighting terror, to more reverberating effects of delegitimization, making Israel and its people a “leprous” state, affecting its economics, security ties, international relations and more. It will be a BDS wet-dream and a shining victory to our terrorist enemies, succeeding in making the righteous suffer and the wicked thrive.

Furthermore, the mere legal recognition in the PA as a “state” by the ICC, which territory comprises all of the pre-1967 borders including the Holly places, will carry dramatic consensuses in the international arena, also will make Jews living in these areas into criminals.

Unfortunately, relying on the ICC to rule in line of the well-established legal framework, according to which the PA is clearly not a state, or to hope that the investigation to be conducted fairly, in unbiased way, or to believe that Israelis will have their day in this court – is both naive and dangerous.

What does Shurat HaDin do?

While the state of Israel, which is not a member state in the Rome Statute, refrains from formally taking part in the ICC proceedings in order not to grant legitimacy to the proceedings against it or undermine its legal position as to the court’s lack of jurisdiction, the floor is left open.

Shurat HaDin was the first Jewish organization to tackle the upcoming ICC danger, beginning our campaign against it in 2015. Our strategy was simple, we brought before the ICC compelling evidence against the PA and Hamas official’s involvement in War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, and either truth shall triumph and this PA move backfires against them, or the ICC’s biased approach will be revealed to all.

Furthermore, in order to reveal the biased nature of the prosecutor’s interest to investigate the Israeli ‘settlements’, while ignoring clear cases of occupation and transfer of population, Shurat HaDin, in representation of Cyprian communities, has approached the ICC prosecutor on the issue of Turkey’s occupation in Northern Cyprus and the transfer of Turkish population to these occupied lands.

Lately, we have also confronted the ICC prosecutors with detailed information on the PA’s ‘pay-to-slay’ scheme, according to which Palestinian prisoners and their families are granted payments by the PA. These payments thus incentivize war crimes because their size and duration are dependent upon the severity of the attack. The PA pays the largest sums to the most egregious violators of international humanitarian law in consequence of the wantonness of the violation. This scheme equals a mafia contract on the heads of Israelis, as every Palestinian knows that they will be rewarded.

Israel and Jewish communities around the world are facing a dangerous international campaign to delegitimize the Jewish State via the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

Unable to defeat the IDF militarily or weaken the population through persistent terrorism, extremist groups have embarked upon a global campaign to demonize, delegitimize and isolate Israel, challenging its right to exist and casting it as a pariah state in the United Nations, as well as academic institutions.

The BDS campaign and its utilization of “lawfare” tactics to attack Israel and Israelis with baseless legal actions is the main component of the “Durban Strategy” adopted by Israel’s opponents at the U.N.’s Human Rights Conference in 2001. Hiding behind BDS activists’ claim of assisting the Palestinian cause lies racial discrimination and anti-Semitism. As the Anti-Defamation League has stated: “The BDS movement at its very core is anti-Semitic.”  Economic, cultural and academic boycotts deliver no political message and in no way influence political policy.

How does Shurat HaDin fight BDS?

Shurat HaDin has taken a lead in combatting BDS, supporting legislation to prohibit and penalize racist and anti-Semitic boycotts, exposing organizations that fund BDS activities, filing legal challenges to unions and academic societies that seek to support and implement BDS policies, and using cutting-edge international and domestic law to foil attempts to weaken Israel’s security.

Shurat HaDin’s recent efforts to fight BDS include:

Successfully blocking a hostile flotilla intent on breaching the Israeli coastal blockade of Gaza by warning maritime insurance carriers and a satellite communication company that providing services to the flotilla could subject them to legal liability for aiding terrorists.

Monitoring the rampant anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in academic institutions by informing the school of its potential civil and criminal liability for tolerating an environment of intimidation and hostility that fails to protect Jewish and Israeli students from anti-Semitic harassment.

Using the legal system to counter boycotts against Israeli companies and academics by seeking to remove the tax exempt status of organizations that promote boycotts

Filing amicus curiae petitions in Israel’s High Court of Justice on behalf of the IDF and intelligence branches.

As an organization aimed at protecting human rights, Shurat HaDin is often notified by concerned individuals about a BDS campaign taking place in their home city. In such a case, Shurat HaDin will analyze the legality of the specific case according to local laws. If the BDS activity is found to be illegal, Shurat HaDin will dispatch a strongly worded warning letter to the campaign organizers and the institutions being targeted.  The letter will advise the organizer that capitulating to the BDS movement and boycotting Israel and Israeli related businesses, academics and cultural persons is unlawful and the organizer may become the subject of civil, administrative and criminal legal action.

If the organizers don’t heed the warning and cease their BDS activities, Shurat HaDin follows through by taking legal action.

The Social Media Battlefield

Just as social media platforms, like Tik-Tok, Twitter and Instagram have become popular and valuable tools for communication, networking, and marketing for individuals and entities around the world, radical Islamic jihadists and other terror groups have also adopted social media to recruit followers, incite violence, and carry out their terrorist activities.

Unfortunately, social media providers have largely turned a blind eye to the use of their services by terrorists, refusing to actively identify and delete known terrorist accounts.  Groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah and Islamic Jihad all utilize social media to disseminate their messages, recruit and raise funds.

Shurat HaDin has initiated a public campaign and activist strategy to challenge these companies for their complicity in the terrorism that their services are used to facilitate and promote.

We have been very active working to compel the social media giants to self-regulate and demanding that elected officials step-in to combat the antisemitism and incitement to hate on the platforms. We accuse the internet giants of turning a blind eye and insist they are liable in aiding and abetting the extremist violence that is originating on social media. We have taken the lead in arguing that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 cannot and must not provide blanket immunity to these companies. They must be viewed as publishers, curators and d editors of the content that appears on their sites. They are not simply “neutral bulletin boards.” The battle over social media continues.