Brussels - The Hague: Europe and the Arabs

Over the past few hours, European media has focused on the dilemma of the failure to implement arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), based in The Hague, Netherlands, against a number of world leaders on charges related to war crimes, genocide, and other crimes. This came after Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán announced that his country would withdraw from the ICC, which had opened an investigation into Hungary for failing to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his recent visit.
According to what was published by the Brussels-based Euronews website, ICC judges asked Hungary to explain why it did not arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visited Budapest earlier this month.
In a file released on Wednesday, the Hague-based court began implementing non-compliance procedures against Hungary after it welcomed Netanyahu with a red carpet welcome despite the court's issuance of an arrest warrant against him for crimes against humanity during the war in Gaza.
What do Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have in common?
Both leaders have arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Theoretically, these warrants are legally binding on all 125 member states that have ratified the 1998 Rome Statute of the court, including all European Union countries. However, the United States, China, and Russia are not members.
Despite being a member of the ICC, Hungary received the Israeli Prime Minister in early April and failed to comply with the arrest warrant issued against him in November 2024 on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the war on Gaza.
Netanyahu condemned the ICC decision, describing it as "anti-Semitic." Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán criticized the court's decision, stating that it had become a "political tool," before announcing his country's withdrawal hours after Netanyahu's arrival.
However, the withdrawal process takes a long time, potentially up to a year after the formal written notification is submitted, meaning Hungary was still obligated to implement the arrest warrant even after announcing its withdrawal.

Speaking to Euronews, Mahmoud Abuwasel, Vice President of the Hague Institute for International Justice, pointed out the court's relatively recent establishment: "It has only been in existence for a little over 20 years, so the cases in which arrest warrants have been issued for heads of state are few."

He added: "But in all these cases, there was clearly a problem with compliance and implementation of the statute." Similar problems arose after the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants between 2009 and 2010 for former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who ruled Sudan from 1989 to 2019.
At that time, some countries refused to arrest al-Bashir, arguing that he enjoyed immunity as a head of state, according to Elizabeth Evenson, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch.
Evenson told Euronews: "ICC judges examined this issue and decided that al-Bashir did not enjoy any immunity, even as a president."
Despite the arrest warrant, al-Bashir was able to visit several ICC member states, according to human rights organizations.
According to legal experts, member states of this UN judicial body must provide justification for not complying with arrest warrants through consultations with the court. However, Mahmoud Abu Wasil explained: "To my knowledge, I have not witnessed any formal consultations by states to justify their failure to implement arrest warrants." The ICC does not have its own police force to enforce its decisions, making it entirely dependent on the cooperation of member states.
Evenson explains, "For the ICC to succeed, it needs the support of governments, as its executive powers are very limited." The only power judges have is to issue rulings, but these are ineffective if states do not implement them.
For example, when Mongolia hosted Russian President Vladimir Putin last September, who is wanted for war crimes related to the deportation of hundreds of children from Ukraine, the ICC judges condemned this legal breach, but the court took no further action.
Evenson explains that the judges could have requested the intervention of the ICC's Member States, which includes representatives of the states that have signed the Rome Statute, to take further action.
She adds, "They could have suspended Mongolia's voting rights in the Assembly of States Parties and suspended its ability to nominate judges to the ICC, especially since a Mongolian judge is currently serving." However, she described the practical response as "weak" and noted the body's reluctance to take further measures against Mongolia, according to Evenson.
Some legal experts believe the ICC needs to strengthen its position to punish violators more severely.
"It is strange that arrest warrants have been ignored for the past 15 years without the court using its powers to impose fines on individuals responsible for non-compliance," says Mahmoud Abu Wasel.
He added: "The court can impose sanctions, including imprisonment or fines, on individuals. Although these measures may seem harsh, they are necessary to deter states from ignoring the court's rulings."
Some point out that ignoring ICC rulings diminishes their value over time, while others believe they can be used as effective leverage.
For example, the arrest warrant issued against Russian President Vladimir Putin has forced him to avoid visiting ICC member states, with the exception of Mongolia.
In contrast, Hungary is the only ICC member state to have received Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu since the arrest warrant was issued against him in November. Although current leaders have not complied with court orders, arrest warrants remain in effect even after their term ends.
Last March, Philippine authorities arrested former President Rodrigo Duterte on an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity related to the drug war.
Evenson explained: "Duterte's case can be seen as a different example compared to Putin and Netanyahu, as it shows that court arrest warrants can be enforced. A few years ago, it was difficult to believe that such warrants could lead to actual arrests. Although Duterte is no longer president, this case confirms the enforceability of court orders."