## Facts

- The Rome Statute created the International Criminal Court (ICC) and authorizes the ICC to prosecute specified crimes when jurisdictional preconditions are met, including when conduct occurs on the territory of a state that has joined the treaty.
- The Rome Statute is deposited with the United Nations (UN) and is open for accession by “all States.”
- In 2009, the Palestinian National Authority sought to join the Rome Statute, but Palestine’s international status as a sovereign state was disputed and it was not a UN member state.
- In 2012, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution granting Palestine “non-member observer State” status within the UN; the resolution did not decide Palestine’s statehood generally, but it referred to Palestinian rights in the “occupied Palestinian territory,” territory also claimed by Israel.
- After obtaining non-member observer State status, Palestine proceeded to join the Rome Statute, and the UN Secretary-General, acting as depositary, accepted Palestine’s accession.
- In 2018, Palestine referred alleged crimes to the ICC for investigation and prosecution, asserting that Israel committed crimes against Palestinians in the “occupied Palestinian territory” beginning in 2014.
- Israel is not a party to the Rome Statute.
- The matter was assigned within the ICC’s pre-trial process to determine whether the ICC could exercise territorial jurisdiction over the referred allegations.

## Issues

1. Whether Palestine qualified as a “State” for purposes of the Rome Statute’s jurisdictional provisions, such that its accession could trigger ICC territorial jurisdiction.
2. If Palestine could be treated as a state for Rome Statute purposes, whether the ICC’s territorial jurisdiction extended to alleged crimes occurring in the “occupied Palestinian territory” (Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem), despite Israel’s nonparty status.

## Decision

- The ICC pre-trial chambers concluded that, for purposes of the Rome Statute, Palestine’s accepted accession permitted the ICC to exercise territorial jurisdiction.
- The ICC determined that its territorial jurisdiction in the Palestine situation extended to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Gaza and the West Bank (including East Jerusalem).
- The ruling addressed jurisdiction for the ICC’s investigation stage and did not resolve the broader dispute between Israel and Palestine over sovereignty or final borders.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Rome Statute, territorial jurisdiction may be based on the location of conduct in the territory of a state that has joined the Statute, even if the alleged perpetrator’s state is not a party.
- For Rome Statute administration, the ICC may treat an entity as a “State” when the entity’s accession has been accepted through the Statute’s accession and depositary process and the ICC’s treaty-based framework recognizes that status for Article 12 purposes.
- A territorial-jurisdiction ruling can define the geographic scope of the Court’s authority for an investigation without deciding title to territory, permanent borders, or general statehood under public international law.
- Arguments that a jurisdictional question has political consequences do not bar the ICC from deciding treaty-based jurisdiction where the Statute assigns that task to the Court.

## Conclusion

The ICC’s pre-trial chambers held that Palestine’s accepted accession to the Rome Statute allowed the Court to exercise territorial jurisdiction over alleged Rome Statute crimes committed in the occupied Palestinian territory—Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem—while leaving broader sovereignty and border questions outside the ruling.


International Criminal Court Pre-Trial Chambers Decision on the Court's Territorial Jurisdiction in Palestine, No. ICC-1/18 (Feb 5, 2021)