Coverage of the International Criminal Court (ICC)
The BBC coverage of the ICC arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant fell short of what should be expected. On the date that the warrants were issued on 21 November 2024, coverage across BBC output, particularly BBC News at one and BBC News at Ten – failed to lead with the story. It was never covered by BBC Newsnight, a flagship BBC news programme.
When it was covered, the BBC overwhelmingly framed the coverage around the positions of Netanyahu and his allies, failing to offer relevant legal context nor adequately representing the perspectives of relevant experts, human rights organisations, states in agreement with the arrest warrants, and most importantly, victims of atrocity crimes.
For example, in this article, the views of Netanyahu and Western allies are given primacy. There is no reference to the victims, nor are there proper details of the war crimes and crimes against humanity Netanyahu is accused of. There are plenty of reports and testimonies of war crimes and crimes against humanity, as well as notable IPC reports that those in northern Gaza are facing death by starvation, which is a direct result of Israeli policy.
This article and as well as other reports give little to no voice to the victims of those policies, which amount to war crimes, as if they do not exist. Where Netanyahu and Gallant are concerned, Palestinian victims are not mentioned. Where Muhammed Deif is concerned, the Israeli victims of the 7 October atrocities are mentioned. To highlight the BBC’s inconsistency in covering these arrest warrants, we can turn to the coverage of the 2023 ICC arrest warrants against President Putin, where the BBC gave proper reference to the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’ response. In contrast, in this case, those accused and their allies, have received ample coverage at the top of the article.
As well as this, despite it being a groundbreaking move in international law, there is no consistent mention of the ICC arrest warrants within coverage. For example, during Netanyahu’s visit to the White House in January 2025, there is no reference to the ongoing arrest warrants and that this is the first time in the US’s history to host someone who is wanted by the ICC, especially the first foreign leader to visit a newly inaugurated president. Additionally, there is no mention of the arrest warrants, nor of war crimes in general amidst Trump’s call to ethnically cleanse Gaza to make it the “riviera of the Middle East”.
The overall impression that seems to be presented in coverage is that the ICC has issued arrest warrants unfairly, or that is simply not that important to talk about.
Coverage of rulings by the International Court of Justice (ICJ)
On the ICJ, the argument has been made that it has not been given enough high-profile coverage on the BBC.
As highlighted by the BBC staff letter criticising BBC coverage, the ICJ ruling in January 2024 that ordered “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide was not reflected in on “broadcast interviews with government representatives, whom we feel should be firmly challenged on their countries’ legal obligations under the genocide convention”.
Like with the ICC, it is also not regularly alluded to as key context in reporting on accusations of war crimes, blocking of humanitarian aid, and settlement expansion in the West Bank.
Additionally, the BBC only broadcast Israel’s defence at the ICJ and not the entire proceeding. Indeed, when certain commentators invoke the ICJ’s “plausibility of genocide” ruling, BBC journalists will often respond that “Israel denies these claims” - a response it seldom makes with issues of international law that does not relate to Israel/Palestine.
Although not directly pertaining to the current war in Gaza, there was also not widespread coverage of the ICJ Advisory Opinion issued in July 2024 on the “Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”, to which direct responsibility falls on the UK government to stop aiding and assisting breaches of international law. In this AO, the ICJ ruled that all settlements are illegal under international law and all third parties have the responsibility to not render aid or assistance to this illegal enterprise. This ruling also said that Israel is breaching Article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Article 3 places the obligation on governments to “prevent prohibit and eradicate all racial segregation and apartheid”.
Given their legal weight and historical significance, it is essential that both ICJ and ICC rulings are regularly referred to in coverage of Israeli conduct within the occupied Palestinian territories. This should not be treated as a matter of politics or opinion, but a fact.