Link:
The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said on Wednesday she launched a formal inquiry into alleged crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories, a move strongly opposed by Israel.
Fatou Bensouda said in a statement the inquiry will be conducted “independently, impartially and objectively, without fear or favour”.
“Today, I confirm the initiation by the office of the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court of an investigation respecting the situation in Palestine,” Bensouda said, adding it will specifically look at allegations since June 13, 2014.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) welcomed the prosecutor’s investigation.
It is “a long-awaited step that serves Palestine’s tireless pursuit of justice and accountability, which are indispensable pillars of the peace the Palestinian people seek and deserve”, the PA foreign ministry said in a statement.
Hamas also praised the ICC’s move and defended its own actions.
“We welcome the ICC decision to investigate Israeli occupation war crimes against our people. It is a step forward on the path of achieving justice for the victims of our people,” Hazem Qassem, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza, told Reuters news agency.
“Our resistance is legitimate and it comes to defend our people. All international laws approve legitimate resistance,” said Qassem.
[...]
“The ICC reached a decision which is the essence of anti-Semitism,” Netanyahu said in the video posted on Twitter.
It is not "anti-Semitism" to criticize or investigate Israeli treatment of occupied territory and "occupied" people. People should not be treated the way Israel treats the Palestinians. Cheap bandying about of the "anti-Semitism" label lessens its impact when it actually does apply. Knee-jerk use of the label offends. Seeking justice is not anti-Semitism. Netanyahu knows better.
_________UPDATE________
RT reports on the ICC/Palestinian/Israeli investigative activity. Aside from those two international media sources, AJ and RT, it is interesting that no other coverage of the current ICC activity was found online. That is not to say U.S. mainstream media collectively withhold coverage; but it suggests editorial parallelism which seems quaint in its own way. A websearch does not return much mainstream posting. Possibly tweaking search terms and using multiple search engines would yield more hits; but that one simple websearch, as phrased, did not pick up the AJ item while returning the RT link.