Hungary rolls out the red carpet for Netanyahu despite ICC arrest warrant

In April 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to Hungary to meet with Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, despite facing an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant related to alleged war crimes in Gaza. The warrant was issued in November 2024, accusing Netanyahu of crimes against humanity that resulted in the deaths of thousands of Palestinians during Israel's military response to the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. Despite being a signatory to the Rome Statute, which obligates member states like Hungary to enforce ICC warrants, Orbán's government has made clear its intent to ignore the warrant, showcasing a growing trend of opposition to international law in Hungary. The context surrounding Netanyahu's visit involves a staunch political alliance between Hungary and Israel, with Orbán publicly expressing his support for Netanyahu, thus rejecting the authority of the ICC. Officials in Hungary have indicated plans to withdraw their country from the ICC, further complicating the legal ramifications of the warrant. This meeting is emblematic of escalating tensions between certain European leaders and international institutions, particularly regarding human rights and the enforcement of laws pertaining to war crimes. This episode highlights a broader challenge confronting the ICC, as its reliance on member states to enforce its warrants creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited for political reasons. Despite international criticism, including statements from human rights organizations condemning Hungary's actions, Orbán and Netanyahu’s meeting signals a deliberate choice to flout accountability mechanisms and reinforce illiberal governance. Analysts argue that Hungary's decision to welcome Netanyahu undermines not only its obligations under international law but also reflects a rising sentiment among some European leaders that privileges national interests over global judicial accountability. The decision to possibly withdraw from the ICC encapsulates an effort by certain states to create legal frameworks that circumvent international scrutiny, thereby raising questions about the future efficacy of global justice initiatives.