The ICC in this case is investigating crimes committed in a party to the Rome treaty, that's not extraterritorial jurisdiction

Even ignoring that one of these cases involves death and destruction and the other doesn't

Your comment can be interpreted in two ways:

1) It must suck for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to be subject to a rogue French judge.

2) It must suck for the judge to face consequences from the US.

> 1) It must suck for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to be subject to a rogue French judge.

How is the french judge "rogue"?

How is a ICC warrant "extra territorial"? It only calls for the arrest of the individual inside ICC member countries.

Yes, but have you considered US politicians don't like the ICC?

What's a bit of truth in the face of that

I think the ambiguity was deliberate.

And very, very clever.

Actually, Israel _was_ a party to the Rome Statute, and thus the ICC. It withdrew its signature in 2002, during the post-Oslo-process intensification of military action against the Palestinians. So, your analogy is flawed.

Yeah. GDPR is annoying as fuck.