*Exclusive* UN Commissioner “President Herzog should be arrested” | The West Report
· Michael West
In a recent interview on The West Report, Chris Sidoti, a senior international human‑rights lawyer and member of the United Nations Independent Commission on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, argued that Israeli President Isaac Herzog should be arrested upon arrival in Australia for alleged incitement to genocide. Sidoti cited findings from the UN commission and the 1948 Genocide Convention, which defines incitement to genocide as “public statements that encourage or justify the commission of genocide.” He contended that Herzog’s remarks about the Gaza conflict, which he said “encourage the destruction of a protected group,” could meet that threshold. The claim raises complex questions about the applicability of the Convention in a diplomatic context, the extent of head‑of‑state immunity under Australian law, and the potential criminal liability of a visiting head of state under the Criminal Code and the Migration Act.
Under the Genocide Convention, states are required to prevent and punish genocide and its incitement, but the Convention does not explicitly address the arrest of foreign dignitaries. Australian courts have traditionally granted diplomatic immunity to heads of state, a principle reinforced by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which Australia has ratified. However, the Australian Criminal Code contains a “diplomatic immunity” exception that can be overridden if the alleged offence is “serious” and the individual is not protected by immunity. Legal scholars argue that the arrest of Herzog would likely trigger a diplomatic crisis, potentially violating Australia’s obligations under the Convention and exposing the government to international legal challenges. Meanwhile, the Australian government has defended the invitation as a diplomatic gesture, emphasizing the importance of maintaining bilateral relations with Israel while acknowledging the need to uphold human‑rights commitments. The debate underscores the delicate balance between sovereign diplomatic practice and the enforcement of international criminal law in a highly politicised arena.
Visit forestarrow.help for more information.