You’re reading that “examinate” in a very specific way. Baerbock says:
“We abide by the law at the national, European, and international level,” she said. “And that is why we are now examining exactly what this means for us in terms of its international application.”
She didn’t say “we’ll examine whether we’re bound to arrest him”, in fact she implicitly said the opposite (“we abide by law”) but “we are examining what it means for us”. As in: They’re looking into how to tell the Israelis that nope, Netanyahu better not come over because the government can’t give him diplomatic immunity when the courts would rather have him arrested. If Netanyahu wants to he could make a scene out of that and how to deal with that kind of situation is, well, what diplomats get paid for. What’s for sure is that Germany won’t spring a trap on him, saying he can come but then arresting him.
Ideally, Israel will extradite him once he’s out of office, or just plainly try him themselves. How to tell the Israelis that that’s indeed the best move they could make (not the left they would happily string up Bibi themselves but people like Gantz) is another thing worth examination.
Diring the press conference yesterday the government speaker Hebestreit said that an “examination” is necessary as the jurisdiction of the ICC would be “not uncontested” despite this having been discussed and ruled by the court in 2021. When asked what Germany did in those three years he said they havent declared to recognise that ruling hence now they have to examine…
Here is the conference to watch. The arrest warrants come up at around minute 4
When asked what Germany did in those three years he said they havent declared to recognise that ruling hence now they have to examine…
Yes. They have to examine exactly how that intersects with German law and what procedure will have to be adhered to.
If you watched that conference you might’ve noticed that they were very clear about Germany sticking to the ICC statutes and the rule of law, while completely avoiding talking about that might mean in concrete terms regarding Netanyahu. That means “Yes we’d arrest him if he’s stupid enough to come here which is the reason he won’t also please stop asking we don’t want any more of a diplomatic headache on a tightrope”.
What about “Germany considers ICC rulings binding” did you not understand. They said it loud and clear. Contrast that to, say, the US, where Biden is on record saying that the ICC lost its marbles (or something to that effect).
That is not what they said. They have questioned the jurisdiction of the ICC, explivtly saying that they didnt make any comment towards acknowledging it since the ruling in 2021.
There is also no procedural problem that would have to be solved. If he is on German soil police arrests him and he gets extradited to the Netherlands. There is well established procedures in regards to international arrest warrents for normal criminals. It is a farce.
Saying they are among the greatest supporter of the court doesnt mean shit, if they cannot directly say that they will uphold a specific ruling.
And the specific ruling is extraordinarily clear. If Netanyahu, Gallant or Deif (if he is still alive) are within German jurisdictiom they have to be arrested and handed over to the ICC.
There is no hypotheticals or ambiguity. Saying there is any and denying to explicitly state upholding this ruling by executing the warrants is denial of it.
And it is a very strong oppositiom to the court, contrary to what the spokespeople claim.
