How Karim Khan pursued Netanyahu over war crimes allegations
The International Criminal Court’s 124 member states, including Britain, would be obliged to arrest Israel’s prime minister if he entered their jurisdiction.
Ever since he said he was seeking an arrest warrant for Binyamin Netanyahu, the International Criminal Court (ICC) chief prosecutor has been accused of waging a one-man campaign against Israel’s prime minister.
Yet Karim Khan KC remains defiant, despite being controversial himself, not least because he is embroiled in sexual misconduct allegations. The spotlight is now firmly on the British lawyer. Israel and its allies have reacted furiously to the issuing of arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister.
The warrants mean that the ICC’s 124 member states, including Britain, would be obliged to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they were to enter their jurisdiction.
Khan, 54, who was born in Edinburgh, has previously represented prominent alleged offenders such as Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of the former dictator of Libya, who is still wanted by the ICC for alleged crimes against humanity.
He also represented Charles Taylor, the former president of Liberia, who was convicted by a special court in 2012 of 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including unlawful killings, rape and sexual slavery.
A whistleblower’s claims that Khan sexually harassed a younger female colleague have led to the lawyer falling under intense scrutiny. The ICC announced this month that there would be an external investigation.
Khan’s supporters say he may be the target of a campaign to discredit him. The lawyer, who denies the allegations, is reported to have said after they surfaced that he would have to resign. But he stayed on, saying he would engage in the investigation.
Khan, who was appointed to his role in 2021, made a public announcement, accompanied by two advisers, to detail seven potential charges against Netanyahu and Gallant. Warrants were also requested for three senior Hamas figures, two of whom are dead. A warrant was issued yesterday (Thursday) for the third, Ibrahim al-Masri, for mass killings, rape and taking hostages.
At the time of his application to the court, Khan said he was not a solitary lawyer on a mission. He was advised by respected colleagues, including Sir Adrian Fulford, a former Court of Appeal and ICC judge, Elizabeth Wilmshurst KC, a former senior Foreign Office lawyer, and Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws, a KC, Labour peer and head of the International Bar Association’s human rights institute.
Khan cited two close “special advisers”, one of whom was Amal Clooney, a human rights specialist. As he announced the warrants he said that “international law and the laws of armed conflict apply to all”.
He added: “No foot soldier, no commander, no civilian leader - no one - can act with impunity. Nothing can justify wilfully depriving human beings, including so many women and children, the basic necessities required for life. Nothing can justify the taking of hostages or the targeting of civilians.”
UK Lawyers for Israel, the campaign group, complained to the Bar’s regulator, arguing that Khan made misleading statements in his application. No ruling has yet been made.
Some senior British lawyers have raised fears about the process, speculating that there is a risk Khan could be influenced by the public mood about such a high-profile issue.
In the United States, the condemnation of Khan was fierce. The White House said it “fundamentally rejects” the ICC’s warrants. The National Security Council said the ICC “does not have jurisdiction over this matter”.
Khan has supporters in the upper echelons of the UK legal profession. One senior human rights law solicitor said he had behaved exactly as a chief prosecutor should. The lawyer said: “Ultimately it was the judges who decided to issue the warrants, not Khan.”
The Times
