> The ICC is responsibility if the crime is committed by a citizen or happens in the territory of a state party of the Rome Statute. Palestine is such a state party
Depends on how you define a state, Palestine not being a full state able to delegate jurisdiction is a big argument against the ICC having any jurisdiction over the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Palestine is neither a full UN member state, nor a state recognized by either the US or Israel. The ICC appears to be trying to set some of precedent for an extremely broad interpretation of their jurisdiction which is clearly at odds with US/Israel views.
> Additionally the UN can hand over cases in non-state parties to the ICC. IIRC that also happened.
Depends on how you define a state, Palestine not being a full state able to delegate jurisdiction is a big argument against the ICC having any jurisdiction over the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Palestine is neither a full UN member state, nor a state recognized by either the US or Israel. The ICC appears to be trying to set some of precedent for an extremely broad interpretation of their jurisdiction which is clearly at odds with US/Israel views.
> Additionally the UN can hand over cases in non-state parties to the ICC. IIRC that also happened.
What case was that?