A swathe of evidence submitted by Türkiye at the International Criminal Court (ICC) has helped bring The Hague to the point of possibly issuing an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and two other officials on charges related to their war on Gaza, according to a Turkish official.

"We have prepared a very comprehensive, orderly file, and bringing up to the court a ready, proven case results in a much more different outcome from other applications," said Emrah Karayel, the head of the Turkish-EU Joint Parliamentary Commission tasked with tracking the ongoing cases at the ICC and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

"An arrest warrant is very likely. It’s not just us but the Israeli media too has been covering the news and officials’ remarks so far have been signal flares because the Zionist lobby is doing its best to prevent such a decision," Karayel told Turkish newspaper Sabah.

Global press and Israeli media have been alit with the news that the ICC was currently preparing to issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and other top officials for alleged violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.

The ICC – which can charge individuals with war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide – is investigating Palestinian resistance group Hamas’ Oct. 7 cross-border attack and Israel’s devastating military assault on the Gaza Strip, now in its seventh month.

Israel earlier this week voiced concern over the claims but Netanyahu insisted the ICC decision would not affect Israel’s actions.

Binding ruling

Türkiye, a staunch defender of the Palestinian cause, is among several other countries including South Africa and Bangladesh, that have called on the ICC to investigate Israeli war crimes in Gaza.

As early as November, the country sent a delegation of 15 legal experts to present a file to The Hague listing Israel’s crimes and violations, citing evidence obtained on-site from Gaza, including notarized testimonies from the injured civilians living there interviewed by phone and information from journalists who currently serve in the enclave and witness Israeli attacks firsthand.

Karayel acknowledged that it was possible Israel may not recognize a potential arrest warrant issued by the ICC since it’s not a member of the court and doesn’t recognize its jurisdiction.

"But the ruling would be still binding for these international figures and could yield concrete outcomes," Karayel argued. "That’s why they’re so worried."

He said the ruling would prove vital for the credibility of the international system, as well.

"It’s important that the world sees there is action to be taken against serious crimes currently being committed through Israel’s case to prove the international system is working," he said. "Because it’s difficult to utilize a system that doesn’t work against certain people on others."

At any rate, the ruling would exert serious pressure on the possible arrest of Netanyahu and the others, since all member nations are bound to the court’s decisions, Karayel said, dismissing the United States' claims that the ICC decision would not be binding.

The U.S., Israel’s ally, is also not a member of the court. A White House spokesperson on Monday said: "The ICC has no jurisdiction in this situation, and we do not support its investigation."

International isolation

Matthew Gillet, a lecturer in international law at the University of Essex in England, said anyone issued with an arrest warrant would be unable to travel to the more than 120 countries that are members of the ICC, including most European countries, Japan and Australia, or they could be detained.

Gillet said if arrest warrants were issued against Israeli officials, some allied countries could take action such as reducing weapons transfers or scaling back diplomatic visits, increasing Israel's international isolation.

It would make "it more difficult for Western liberal democracies to engage with Israel," he said.

Israel has waged an unrelenting offensive on Gaza since a cross-border attack by Hamas last Oct. 7, which killed some 1,200 people.

More than 34,500 Palestinians have since been killed, mostly women and children, and thousands injured amid mass destruction and severe shortages of necessities.

Israel has also imposed a crippling siege on the seaside enclave, leaving most of its population, particularly residents of northern Gaza, on the verge of starvation.

More than six months into the Israeli war, vast swathes of Gaza lay in ruins, pushing 85% of the enclave's population into internal displacement amid a crippling blockade of food, clean water and medicine, according to the U.N.

Genocide case

The ICC investigation is separate from a case filed by South Africa at the ICJ, which accuses Israel of perpetuating genocide in the Gaza Strip.

An interim ruling in January ordered Tel Aviv to stop genocidal acts and take measures to guarantee that humanitarian assistance is provided to civilians in Gaza, which Israel has so far steadily ignored.

Türkiye on Wednesday announced it will also officially join the case next to South Africa, as well as Nicaragua and Colombia, the only other two countries to have applied to the court so far.

"We are working on our formal application and will present it to the court once the legal text is drafted," Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan told a news conference with his Indonesian counterpart Retno Marsudi.

Fidan added that they will continue working with friendly countries and allies on what else can be done and to convince other countries to join them in the trial.

"Türkiye will always stand with the people of Palestine," he stressed.

Turkish Parliament’s Justice Committee chief Cüneyt Yüksel, separately on Wednesday, confirmed the draft was fast underway.

"As we have done until today, we will continue our efforts with determination to ensure the condemnation of Israel, which has been condemned by the conscience of humanity, and also in the eyes of the law," Yüksel said in a written statement.

"Türkiye is hoping the ICJ will act in accordance with the principle that international law must be applied equally to all without exceptions," he added, pointing to Israel’s 75 years of "apartheid," 56 years of "occupation" and 16-year siege aimed at the "colonization and annexation of Palestinian territories."

Yüksel also assured the Turkish parliamentary committee would stay on top of both ICJ and ICC cases, "both of which we hope will support and feed one another."

The committee plans to visit the ICC soon to share additional evidence with South Africa’s lawyers and U.N. institutions, Yüksel informed.

Legal grounds

Türkiye has the right to join in the genocide case per Article 63 of the Statute of ICJ, which allows states to intervene when it comes to interpreting conventions to which they are party and even if they are not parties to the dispute.

"Should a state consider that it has an interest of a legal nature which may be affected by the decision in the case, it may submit a request to the Court to be permitted to intervene," Article 62 of the statute of the court says.

Nicaragua had stated that it would intervene in the case filed by South Africa within the scope of Article 62 of the Statute of the Court.

Secondly, in the request for intervention in accordance with Article 63 of the Statute of the Court, the opportunity to make a general statement regarding how the contract in dispute should be interpreted, rather than the concrete event in dispute.

Accordingly, if Türkiye's application for intervention is accepted, it will be able to make statements on how the 1948 U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, which forms the basis for South Africa's case, should be interpreted.

When Türkiye takes this step, it will be the first country among the members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to intervene in the case filed by South Africa at the ICJ against Israel.

In accordance with the second paragraph of Article 63 of the ICJ Statute, it is reported that the interpretation of the Genocide Convention made by the Court in its decision will be binding on the countries that are parties to the case as well as the countries that are involved in the case.

It is noteworthy that the binding issue in question is only about how the Genocide Convention will be interpreted, and that it does not constitute a basis for filing any lawsuit in the future in terms of current or historical events that concern Türkiye.

The ICJ announced that Colombia filed a declaration of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court.

In addition, it was reported in the press that countries such as Ireland, Belgium, Jordan and Libya were also evaluating the possibilities of involvement in the case against Israel.