The Hague, Netherlands — In a move laden with legal gravity and political sensitivity, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is reportedly issuing sealed arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials, signalling a quiet but momentous shift in the international pursuit of accountability for alleged war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories.

As revealed by The Guardian, the Court has opted to keep recent warrants confidential — a rare measure believed to be designed to insulate its operations from mounting diplomatic pressure. The decision allows the ICC to act without fanfare, limiting interference while advancing investigations into alleged violations in Gaza and the West Bank.

At the centre of this unfolding legal drama is ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, who is said to be leading the push behind closed doors. Among those reportedly under investigation are Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant — both widely seen as central figures in the conduct of recent military campaigns that devastated civilian life and infrastructure in Gaza.

The use of sealed warrants means that these officials would not be notified unless they enter the territory of an ICC member state — at which point they could be arrested and brought before the Court.

This discreet legal manoeuvring comes in response to growing demands from human rights organisations and UN bodies, who have long warned of the disproportionate use of force and the targeting of civilian areas in Gaza. With tens of thousands of Palestinians killed, injured, or displaced, and critical infrastructure systematically destroyed, pressure on the ICC to act has reached new heights.

For Palestinians and international legal advocates, these developments offer a rare glimmer of hope. While the ICC has been criticised for the slow pace of its work and its perceived bias, the possibility of arrest warrants — however secretive — marks a significant moment in the struggle for justice.

In the absence of public statements from the Court, speculation continues to mount. But behind the silence of The Hague, a question resounds: could this be the long-awaited beginning of genuine accountability under international law?