{"id":309133,"date":"2025-07-09T16:56:25","date_gmt":"2025-07-09T20:56:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?post_type=document&p=309133"},"modified":"2025-07-17T17:04:17","modified_gmt":"2025-07-17T21:04:17","slug":"icc-decision-non-un-doc-09jul25","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/icc-decision-non-un-doc-09jul25\/","title":{"rendered":"Decision on request for leave to reply to Prosecution Response to Israel\u2019s \u201cAppeal of \u2018Decision on Israel\u2019s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice\u2019 (ICC-01\/18-375)\u201d (Non-UN Document)"},"content":{"rendered":"

 <\/p>\n

This is a non-Â鶹APP document. The Â鶹APP provides these documents only as a convenience for reference purposes, and the inclusion of a document does not imply the endorsement of its content by the Â鶹APP.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Original: English<\/strong><\/p>\n

No. ICC-01\/18 OA3<\/strong><\/p>\n

Date: 9 July 2025<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE APPEALS CHAMBER<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Before:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong><\/p>\n

Judge Tomoko Akane, Presiding<\/strong><\/p>\n

Judge Luz del Carmen Ib\u00e1\u00f1ez Carranza <\/strong><\/p>\n

Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa<\/strong><\/p>\n

Judge Gocha Lordkipanidze <\/strong><\/p>\n

Judge Erdenebalsuren Damdin<\/strong><\/p>\n

SITUATION IN THE STATE OF PALESTINE<\/strong><\/p>\n

Public Document<\/strong><\/p>\n

Decision on request for leave to reply to Prosecution Response to Israel\u2019s \u201cAppeal of \u2018Decision on Israel\u2019s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice<\/a>\u2019 (ICC-01\/18-375)\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court,<\/p>\n

In the appeal of the State of Israel against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I entitled \u201cDecision on Israel\u2019s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice<\/a>\u201d of 21 November 2024 (ICC-01\/18-375),<\/p>\n

Having before it the Request for leave to reply to Prosecution Response to Israel\u2019s \u201cAppeal of \u2018Decision on Israel\u2019s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice\u2019 (ICC-01\/18-375)\u201d of 13 June 2025 (ICC-01\/18-441),<\/p>\n

Pursuant to regulation 24(5) of the Regulations of the Court,<\/p>\n

Renders <\/em>unanimously the following<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

D E C I S I O N<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The State of Israel may file a reply to the Prosecution Response to Israel\u2019s \u201cAppeal of \u2018Decision on Israel\u2019s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice<\/a>\u2019 (ICC-01\/18-375)\u201d by 16 July 2025, as specified in paragraphs 12-13 of the present decision. The reply shall not exceed 15 pages.<\/p>\n

REASONS<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/h3>\n

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY<\/strong><\/h3>\n
    \n
  1. On 21 November 2024, Pre-Trial Chamber I (hereinafter: \u201cPre-Trial Chamber\u201d) issued the \u201cDecision on Israel\u2019s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice<\/a>\u201d (hereinafter: \u201cImpugned Decision\u201d), thereby rejecting the request submitted by the State of Israel (hereinafter: \u201cIsrael\u201d) pursuant to article 18 of the Statute.1<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  2. On 14 May 2025, the Pre-Trial Chamber granted Israel\u2019s request for leave to appeal on the following issue: \u201c[w]hether the Pre-Trial Chamber erred in finding that no new situation had arisen, and that no substantial change had occurred in the parameters of the investigation into the situation, following 7 October 2023\u201d.2<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  3. On 26 May 2025, Israel filed its appeal brief against the Impugned Decision (hereinafter: \u201cAppeal Brief\u201d).3<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  4. On 9 June 2025, the Prosecutor filed his response to Israel\u2019s Appeal Brief (hereinafter: \u201cProsecutor\u2019s Response\u201d).4<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  5. On 13 June 2025, Israel filed a request for leave to reply to the Prosecutor\u2019s Response (hereinafter: \u201cRequest\u201d).5<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
  6. On 18 June 2025, the Prosecutor filed his response to the Request (hereinafter: \u201cResponse to Request\u201d).6<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n

    II. MERITS<\/strong><\/h3>\n

    A. Summary of the submissions<\/h3>\n
      \n
    1. Israel requests, pursuant to regulation 24(5) of the Regulations of the Court (hereinafter: \u201cRegulations\u201d), the Appeals Chamber to grant it leave to reply to the Prosecutor\u2019s Response with respect to the following four issues: (i) the Prosecutor\u2019s assertion that the \u201cSummary of Preliminary Examination Findings\u201d formed part of the notification to Israel pursuant to article 18(1) of the Statute; (ii) the Prosecutor\u2019s submission that \u201cIsrael \u2018did not raise any issue regarding the scope of the investigation\u2019 during the period that it was cooperating with the Office of the Prosecutor\u201d; (iii) the Prosecutor\u2019s assertion that statements made by referring States during the Assembly of States Parties should be accorded weight; and (iv) the Prosecutor\u2019s reliance on two documents presented for the first time in the Prosecutor\u2019s Response (hereinafter: \u201cFour Issues\u201d).7<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
    2. Israel argues that a reply with respect to the Four Issues \u201cwill assist the adjudication of the present appeal\u201d.8<\/sup><\/a> Israel also argues that a \u201cfull presentation of the issues and facts\u201d is of particular importance due to the broader significance of its appeal in relation to the principle of complementarity and the relationship between the Court and States, in particular States not party to the Statute.9<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n
    3. The Prosecutor submits that none of the issues raised by Israel amount to a new issue arising from the Prosecutor\u2019s Response or could not have been reasonably anticipated, and that \u201cthe proposed reply is not necessary for the Appeals Chamber\u2019s adjudication of the present Appeal\u201d.10<\/sup><\/a> The Prosecutor further avers that the issues that are the subject of the Request \u201chad already been raised or foreshadowed\u201d, and that, by requesting leave to reply, Israel seeks to \u201csupplement and elaborate on arguments that were already raised in its Appeal\u201d.11<\/sup><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      B. Determination by the Appeals Chamber<\/h3>\n
        \n
      1. Regulation 24(5) of the Regulations provides:<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n