Comment by bawolff
1 month ago
Israel was given notice of an investigation being opened as was required when the investigation was first opened many years ago.
So far, Israel has not provided any sort of proof that they have initiated a serious independent criminal investigation into the alleged misconduct. If they did, i suspect the warrant would go away.
Find me another case of “justice” where the prosecution started before the crimes being prosecuted were allegedly committed.
The prosecution hasn't even started yet. The prosecution doesn't start until the alleged perpretators are either captured or turn themselves in (neither of which is likely to happen). Neither an investigation nor a warrant is the same thing as a trial. No evidence has been publicly presented yet, nobody has been found guilty.
Almost no other justice systems require notice that a mere investigation has been opened. So to answer your question, basically all of them.
All investigations start before the crimes they will eventually find are committed?
1 reply →
You expect the Israeli courts to have started an investigation on crimes that had not yet been committed.
No, but at this point the alleged crimes were allegedly comitted (or started to be comitted. The ICC prosecutor would presumably argue that some of the alleged crimes are ongoing or at least were up until the ceasefire) years ago. At best, that argument might have worked when the warrants were first announced, but its been years now. There has been more then enough time to start an investigation. If they were serious about it, they can still start one tomorrow.
The charges made are for crimes allegedly committed after the “investigation” was started.
This indicates that the prosecutor was on a witch-hunt.
Perhaps the Israeli courts, who are independent of the Netanyahu government, have not initiated proceedings because they don’t believe there’s a valid case to be made.