The accusation against members of Italian government for complicity in genocide

Sender

Jurists and Lawyers for Palestine

info@giuristiavvocatiperlapalestina.org

Date: October 1, 2025

Subject: Communication regarding alleged crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court

1. Introduction

This communication is submitted pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute and is intended to bring to the attention of the Office of the Prosecutor elements of fact and law that substantiate the commission of one or more crimes falling under the jurisdiction of the Court, with the aim of securing the immediate initiation of proceedings before it.

The communication concerns facts and acts relating to the situation in Gaza, which has been under the Court’s consideration for several years and on which it has continuously focused, particularly in light of the tragic escalation of crimes committed.

The complaint highlights certain aspects of international complicity, in particular that of members of the Italian government, which have enabled the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity already under investigation by the Court, as well as the implementation of the genocidal plan currently under adjudication before the International Court of Justice.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the International Criminal Court evaluate the possibility of including this matter within the already open case file, taking into account the contributions this complaint may provide to the ongoing investigation.

At the same time, it is linked to the contentious jurisdiction proceedings brought by South Africa, and subsequently by several other States, before the International Court of Justice against Israel on charges of genocide, as it concerns Italy’s complicity in the same, manifested in the supply of weaponry and other actions aimed at facilitating the commission of the crime in question.

Israel’s responsibility, and thus that of its political and military leaders, for genocide has been clearly affirmed by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, established on 27 May 2021 by the United Nations Human Rights Council, in its report of 16 September 2025 (a-hrc-60-crp-3.pdf).

It must also be emphasized, already at this introductory stage, that without the substantial support provided by various Western States, including Italy in particular, the military offensive undertaken by Israel since 7 October 2023—an offensive aimed also, and above all, at the civilian population—would not have been possible. This offensive has resulted in a number of civilian victims certainly not fewer than 60,000, of whom between one-half and one-third are children, not to mention those dying of starvation and those who have suffered irreparable harm.

We submit that there exists complicity on the part of the Italian government in the aforementioned Israeli crimes, and that the resulting responsibility lies with the principal members of the Italian government, namely the President of the Council of Ministers, Giorgia Meloni, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister, Antonio Tajani, and the Minister of Defense, Guido Crosetto. These individuals must be regarded as culpable, as they exercised decision-making power concerning military and security cooperation with Israel and the authorization of arms supplies, without being able to invoke any immunity of a personal or functional nature, given that the activities in question were carried out in manifest disregard of both domestic and international legal norms.

In addition to the three members of government just mentioned, culpability must also be attributed, for complicity in genocide and in other grave war crimes and crimes against humanity, to the Chief Executive Officer and General Director of Italy’s leading arms manufacturing company, Leonardo S.p.A., Roberto Cingolani. He holds decision-making authority concerning the transfer of weaponry and military equipment of various kinds to Israel, as well as the implementation of cooperative projects with that State which are facilitating the commission of such crimes.

“

2. Summary of the Facts

The ongoing extermination of the Palestinian people in Gaza has entered a new and tragic phase, marked by the resumption of massive and indiscriminate bombardments and by the exclusion of the population from all forms of humanitarian aid and access to basic necessities. According to explicit statements made by leading Israeli political and military authorities, the purpose of this offensive is to force Palestinians to abandon their land, amounting to a true operation of ethnic cleansing. However, its indiscriminate nature and the undeniable fact that large numbers of Palestinian civilians are its victims simultaneously highlight its genocidal character, as evidenced by the clear applicability to the ongoing extermination of Article II of the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide, which defines genocide as:

            “Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

• (a) Killing members of the group;
• (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
• (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
• (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
• (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

These acts have been carried out with full awareness of the intended goal, as emerges from various statements by Israeli political and military officials, who explicitly posit the elimination of Palestinians—without distinction between civilians and combatants—as their ultimate objective.

The international crimes committed by the Israeli government against the Palestinian population in Gaza and the West Bank would not be possible without a vast network of international complicities, which in turn entail the commission of various crimes. Such complicity manifests itself both through actions and omissions. Given the well-known and widely broadcast nature of these events, made public in real time by the media, full awareness of their actions and omissions on the part of those responsible for this complicity must be presumed.

1. a) The Complicity of the Italian Government in Israel’s Crimes

Through its support of the Israeli government, in particular by supplying deadly weaponry, the Italian government has rendered itself guilty of complicity in the ongoing genocide and in the grave war crimes and crimes against humanity committed against the Palestinian population, both in Gaza and in the West Bank, especially since October 7, 2023.

A1) Supply of Weapons, Ammunition, and Military Services

At first, the Italian government denied having carried out shipments of weapons to Israel, but later, on April 11, 2024, it admitted this in Parliament through the response of Undersecretary Silli to a parliamentary question. On that occasion, it was confirmed, based on ISTAT data, that after October 7, 212 export operations had taken place, with a total value of €4.3 million. This admission was accompanied by a statement claiming that the exports were based on licenses issued prior to October 7, and that, in any case, the weapons sent from Italy would not be used to target the Palestinian civilian population. It is unclear on what grounds this statement rests. It is most likely a pious wish or, at best, an entirely uncritical repetition of vague information provided by Israeli authorities. The statement, however, appears to be contradicted by the facts and by the dynamics of the ongoing genocide.

As experts have underlined, providing maintenance and spare parts for weapons systems or ammunition in support of an army such as Israel’s, which then carries out continuous and massive attacks on the population of Gaza, certainly has an impact on civilians. Furthermore, it is unclear who could possibly monitor and verify that this is not the case. The government’s position was essentially reiterated by Deputy Foreign Minister Edmondo Cirielli in response to a new parliamentary question at the end of the following month, May 2024.

The fallacy of the weak justifications put forward by the Italian government can, moreover, be easily verified in relation to what is known about the supplies and assistance it has provided to Israel—although the heavy veil of secrecy improperly imposed suggests that what has so far emerged is merely the tip of an iceberg, the greater part of which remains hidden.

Below we provide a summary—certainly incomplete—overview of the military support supplied by Italy to Israel, as can be gathered mainly from the press, both Italian and Israeli.

1. a) First of all, reference must be made to the “light” weapons supplied by Beretta, which are used by Israeli settlers in the West Bank in their daily hunt for Palestinians.

1. b) Attention must also be drawn to the supply of high-powered explosive devices produced on Italian soil, as well as to the granting of transit rights for various types of weaponry which have undoubtedly contributed, in no small measure, to the killing of at least sixty thousand victims—mostly civilians—in Gaza and the West Bank.

1. c) Another significant element is the admission by the state-owned company Leonardo that it will continue, throughout 2025, its program of remote technical assistance, equipment repair, and spare parts supply for Israel’s fleet of M-346 aircraft. It must be recalled that M-346 aircraft are used by the Israeli Air Force for training, which is the main actor in the indiscriminate bombings forming the central component of the ongoing genocidal strategy.

1. d) Also noteworthy is the role played by certain Italian bases and airports where U.S. troops are also stationed. This role is revealed by data on military flights conducted over Palestine and Lebanon between October 2023 and October 2024, which enabled Israel to receive assistance both in terms of military supplies and intelligence. These data highlight the role of the Sigonella base and the military airports of Ancona, Bari, Brindisi, Ciampino, and Naples. Italian military infrastructures proved crucial in structuring a continuous air bridge, with over six thousand flights in one year, allowing Israel to receive aerial supplies and intelligence from allied powers. Of these missions, 1,900 directly concerned the delivery of military equipment. Among the six thousand flights overall, 631 had Italy as either origin or destination, including 34 flights of the “Shadow 31” aircraft, equipped with special sensors and devices for intelligence gathering used during Israeli military operations. Particularly significant was the role of the Sigonella base, from which 101 military flights originated, as well as 65 of the 73 flights carried out by the MQ-4C Triton drone, tasked with surveilling the area of Israeli military operations. From Sigonella also departed at least 13 flights of the United States Transportation Command, responsible for transporting military personnel and equipment, to the Israeli base of Nevatim. Finally, mention must be made of the role of the Niscemi military base, which hosts about forty MUOS antennas providing telecommunications services to the United States and its allies, including Israel.

1. e) Further reference should be made to the supply of 76/62 Super Rapido MF cannons, capable of firing up to 120 rounds per minute and used to bombard Gaza from the sea, sold by Oto-Melara to the Israeli Navy for an amount of 440 million U.S. dollars.

1. f) Added to this are recent press revelations regarding the delivery, by Leonardo Helicopters’ U.S.-based facilities, of AW119Kx helicopters to the Flight Training School “Vihiys Latisah” of the Israeli Air Force, located at Hatzerim Air Base in the Negev Desert.

1. g) Leonardo has also provided Israel, in particular through the Israeli company Rada—which was itself acquired by Leonardo—with decisive assistance in transforming bulldozers into deadly weapons designed to demolish houses and crush or bury their inhabitants under the rubble. This circumstance is also highlighted in the report by the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, entitled “From the Economy of Occupation to the Economy of Genocide”, dedicated to the responsibilities of private companies in the ongoing extermination.

2023. h) Francesca Albanese’s report also shows that Leonardo is an integral part of the international program aimed at developing the F-35 warplane, supplied to Israel and employed in the deliberate and indiscriminate bombings carried out especially since October 8, 2023.

1. i) Leonardo is also part, together with other well-known companies in the sector—such as the British BAE Systems and the French Airbus—of the European consortium led by the U.S. company MBDA, which produces the lethal GBU-39 bomb, used in the devastating carpet bombings that have constituted the main instrument of genocide.

1. j) The dense international interconnection among companies belonging to the military-industrial complex also enables Israel not only to purchase weapons but to produce and export them itself, with the significant added value of having tested them on Palestinians. The Milex report on foreign arms suppliers to Italy highlights the increase in purchases specifically from Israeli companies, with a multi-year financial commitment of at least half a billion, and in fact between 600 and 700 million euros. A cross-check of the data in this report with those contained in Francesca Albanese’s report just mentioned reveals that Israel is currently the world’s eighth-largest arms exporter. On the one hand, it sells cutting-edge weaponry—tested in the field, namely on the backs of Palestinians—to various States, including Italy; on the other, thanks to this dense network of international technical cooperation, it produces armaments specifically dedicated to carrying out the ongoing genocide.

Further elements have recently emerged following the mobilization of dockworkers in Italy, France, and other European countries, who temporarily blocked the transfer of military material to Israel. Recent mobilizations in port cities such as Genoa, Livorno, and Ravenna have exposed and, in some cases, even prevented the shipment to Israel of weapons, ammunition, explosives, and other instruments of genocide.

5. l) An analysis conducted by the IRIAD Institute of the Disarmament Archive, by cross-checking data from various Italian and international sources (Sipri, Istat – Coeweb portal for foreign trade statistics – and the Government’s report on arms exports), and contradicting the statements of Ministers Crosetto and Tajani, established that in 2024 Italy exported arms and ammunition (category 93) worth approximately €5.8 million, of which only 11% was explicitly listed under the subcategories “non-lethal weapons” (cat. 9304), “parts and accessories” (cat. 9305), and “bombs, grenades and torpedoes” (cat. 9306). Moreover, in just the first two months of 2025, under the generic category “weapons, ammunition and their parts and accessories,” Italy shipped to Israel arms worth more than €128,000, of which only €47,249 were recorded by ISTAT. The report sets out not only the authorizations for the export of major weapons systems to Israel between 2019 and 2023—amounting to $26.7 million (€23.4 million)—including 12 AW119 Koala helicopters from Leonardo S.p.A. and 44 76mm Super Rapid naval cannons, produced respectively in Vergiate (VA) and La Spezia, in addition to stable cooperation in the F-35 fighter jet program with components produced in Italy and supplied for Israeli aircraft—but also highlights more recent exports that “show an even more structured cooperation between Italy and Israel.” Particularly significant is the chapter on “air and space navigation” technologies (cat. 88), including aircraft, drones, and radar worth €34 million, of which as much as €31 million are not categorized in detail in Coeweb, making them difficult to trace. This category probably also includes the sale of the M-346 Master jet, used for advanced military training but, with minor modifications, also suitable for bombing missions; Leonardo has even announced its conversion into a combat aircraft under the designation M-346 FA, with the installation of a Nexter 20 mm cannon.

2. m) It is also necessary to emphasize the export of machines for automatic data processing (cat. 8471). According to Coeweb, in 2024 Italy exported to Israel €2.7 million worth of industrial computers, optical readers, and devices for coded data input and processing—tools essential for military infrastructures, logistics, and artificial intelligence. Such technologies can be used for dual-use purposes, including drone control, automated targeting, and the command of military operations.

5. n) In 2024, Italy authorized, according to Coeweb data, exports of “weapons, ammunition, and their parts and accessories” worth about €5.8 million, of which only 11% were classified. The rest—“in other words, almost the entirety of arms and ammunition exports”—was carried out “without public detail.” This often takes place under the secrecy clauses permitted by Law 185/1990, which governs arms trade authorizations to countries at war.

1. o) The analysis carried out by IRIAD shows that the most significant item among these shipments is “air and space navigation,” meaning aircraft, drones, radars, and components for military use—precisely the weapons that the government had excluded from shipments to Israel. In this category, Italy sent parts worth over €34 million, although only €3 million are precisely classified by Coeweb. These include engines for drones, light helicopters, and radar components, while €31 million remain in generic and unspecified subcategories. According to IRIAD, this is the category in which the sale of the M-346 Master jet falls.

1. p) Also relevant are the revelations by opposition MP Bruno Marton, leader of the Five Star Movement in the Defense Committee, who accused Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani of lying about the export of military materials to Israel. Marton referred to the seizure, by the Ravenna Prosecutor’s Office, of over thirteen tons of “iron works and forgings” destined for Israel. He also cited the export to Israel of “detonating cords,” unprecedented quantities of ammonium nitrate (used for explosives production), and even substantial amounts of tritium (used for the production of nuclear bombs). In this regard, mention should also be made of the seizure carried out by the Customs and Monopolies Agency on the orders of the Ravenna Prosecutor’s Office. The investigation revealed the existence of significant prior exports to Israel.

1. q) Minister Tajani’s reticence thus fits into a broader pattern of concealment of arms, ammunition, and various services transfers to Israel. It should be recalled that many such transfers are covered by political, diplomatic, and military secrecy, which makes it extremely difficult to ascertain their true nature. Such secrecy is essentially designed to prevent the verification of their compatibility with domestic and international law. This secrecy is all the more unacceptable in the present situation, marked by daily violations of the Palestinian people’s right to life, of which it constitutes, in effect, an essential mechanism carried out with the full awareness of the competent government authorities.

1. r) The Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Italian Republic and the Government of the State of Israel on cooperation in the military and defense sector, signed in Paris on June 16, 2003, represents in this respect a true smoking gun, given that its contents remained unknown due to the existence of a secret agreement between Italy and Israel. A request for access to administrative documents, submitted by several jurists, finally made it possible to uncover the content of this agreement, which essentially provides for the imposition of secrecy on the concrete contents of the cooperation, at the request of either or both parties—reimposing an insurmountable veil of unknowability.

1. s) By reiterating in Parliament, on behalf of the Italian government, his refusal to take the steps necessary to prevent the automatic renewal of this Memorandum, the Minister for Relations with Parliament, Luca Ciriani, confirmed the existence of a vast network of complicity in the military sector. This network concerns research, production, and distribution of weapons for war purposes, assistance in military personnel training, and the provision of intelligence—all of which are integral components of the ongoing genocidal mechanism centered on the Israeli government, enabling it to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity for which its leading figures are accused before this Court.

1. t) The aforementioned report by UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, also sheds light on the role of Leonardo, which is not only Italy’s main arms company but also a private enterprise with majority public participation, and thus under government control. The report, as is well known dedicated to the role of companies in genocide, denounces Leonardo’s contribution to the supply of fighter aircraft: “Israel benefits from the largest defense procurement program ever implemented, the one for the F-35 fighter jet, led by the U.S. Lockheed Martin, together with at least 1,600 companies, including the Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A., and eight States.” The report stresses that after October 2023, F-35s and F-16s were crucial in giving Israel unprecedented air power, capable of dropping about 85,000 tons of bombs, killing and injuring more than 179,411 Palestinians, and destroying Gaza.

1. u) Particularly significant, given the advanced technological characteristics of Israel’s current military operations and their associated war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide, are the extensive activities of cooperation in the IT and electronics sectors, aimed directly or indirectly at developing equipment that can be used in this context. Italy’s largest financial institution, directly dependent on the government—the Cassa Depositi e Prestiti (CDP)—plays a decisive role in these activities. Through CDP Venture Capital, CDP took part in a funding round for the Israeli tech company Classiq, one of the leading firms in quantum software platforms, in which CDP had already invested via Neva, the venture capital fund of Banca Intesa. The news, published on Monday, August 11, 2025, by the Israeli financial daily Globes, is that CDP—with the blessing of the Italian government—intends to invest tens of millions of euros in Israeli tech companies, starting with those specializing in artificial intelligence. “Giorgia Meloni is fully aware of the fund’s activity, which is considered an important instrument of government policy and a means to promote its objectives, such as a multi-billion-euro program in favor of AI,” explained a well-informed Israeli source to the Tel Aviv newspaper. It should be noted that this is not CDP’s first investment in Israeli companies operating in the security field. Through Neva, for example, the body that manages Italians’ postal savings has also invested in Cyberint, a cybersecurity company. Furthermore, investments in Israel are part of the portfolio of Indaco Bio, in which CDP Venture Capital participates, through Terra Venture Partners, a Tel Aviv-based fund specialized in financing Israeli tech companies.

1. v) Particularly noteworthy, as reported in the July–August 2025 issue of the journal Altreconomia, are unpublished data attesting, among other things, to shipments from Italy to Israel since 2024 of detonating cords (140 tons worth €2,078,458), ammonium nitrate (5,980 tons), tritium, and other key materials for explosives and nuclear weapons.

1. w) Given the characteristics of Israel’s exterminatory operations against the Palestinian population in Gaza, where technology and IT equipment play a major role, due attention must finally be given to the Italy–Israel agreement on so-called cybersecurity. This agreement has launched numerous collaborations in research and technological development with various Italian academic and research institutions, also concerning technologies susceptible to military use.

1. x) The recent assaults on the Flotilla carried out with drones would appear, according to some reports, to have also involved Italian territory and waters over which the Italian State exercises sovereignty and control. In particular, a dossier prepared by the Global Movement on Gaza, organizer of the humanitarian expedition, states that at least some of these drones departed from Sicily.

1. y) Last but not least, reference must be made to the so-called “decompression” periods, meaning paid vacations in Italy enjoyed by groups of Israeli soldiers, presumably involved in genocide and war crimes, in scenic Italian locations such as Porto San Giorgio, the Conero, and the Frasassi caves in the Marche, as well as various sites in Sardinia. The fact that these were not spontaneous initiatives is demonstrated by the constant surveillance of these groups of soldiers by units of the Italian State Police responsible for political matters (General Directorate of General Information and Special Operations – DIGOS). This suggests the existence of framework or even more specific agreements between the Italian State and the Israeli authorities. Scientific and technical literature on the subject states unequivocally that such “decompression operations” are an integral part of military strategy and activity and therefore, in a case such as this, of the strategy and activity of genocide.

1. z) We are thus confronted with an impressive body of evidence demonstrating the direct involvement of the Italian State in the strategies and activities of genocide carried out by the Israeli regime in Gaza and the West Bank. It is worth reiterating that the secrecy surrounding the agreements on military and “security” cooperation between Italy and Israel prevents a full understanding of the extent of this involvement. Nonetheless, the elements that have emerged are extremely significant, and their examination clearly leads to the conclusion of Italy’s responsibility—and therefore of those who direct its foreign and defense policy.

A2) Italy’s Role in Obstructing Humanitarian Aid to the Palestinian Population and Its Positions on the Arrest Warrants Issued by the International Criminal Court

The Israeli plan of ethnic cleansing and genocide also relies on the blockade of all supplies of essential goods, which has already caused the death by starvation of thousands of Palestinians, especially children. To implement this plan, Israel has sidelined international humanitarian agencies, particularly those operating under the United Nations. In this regard, it is worth noting the cessation of Italian funding to UNRWA, which has not been resumed, contrary to the actions of other States. The dismantling of this UN agency’s activities is in fact a major factor in the current food crisis, which today, according to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, has left 22 percent of Gaza’s 2.4 million inhabitants in a state of humanitarian catastrophe, while the entire population faces food insecurity or worse.

Taken together, the elements indicated above establish the certainty of Italy’s significant contribution to the ongoing genocide, as well as to the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity currently under the consideration of this Court, which has issued two arrest warrants in this regard against Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant. Further evidence of the Italian government’s complicity in these crimes can moreover be inferred from the statements made by various members of the government itself expressing their intention not to enforce such arrest warrants. These statements, in addition to constituting an inadmissible insult to an institution such as the International Criminal Court—founded precisely in Rome twenty-seven years ago—form part of a context of strong and complicit political solidarity with the Israeli government, confirmed among other things by Italy’s votes in the main United Nations bodies. Moreover, when considered within the broader framework of relations between Italy and Israel, this unjustified reluctance to implement the decisions of this Court constitutes further weighty evidence of culpability in Italy’s complicity with Israel in the crimes of which that State and its leaders stand accused.

It should be recalled that these and other elements justifying the charges against the Italian government for complicity in the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government have long been submitted to the Prosecutor’s Office in Rome, the competent judicial authority, through a formal complaint, which has, however, so far received no response. The incriminated conduct referenced in that complaint, which focuses on the violation of Article III(e) of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide—which criminalizes complicity in genocide—may also constitute complicity in the commission of other crimes provided for under the Statute of this Court, in particular crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Legal Qualification of the Facts

1. a) Israel’s Crimes

The criminal conduct carried out in recent years by the State of Israel, which has led to the violent suppression or death by starvation of, according to the most conservative estimates, over fifty thousand Palestinians, many of whom are children, is punishable under various articles of the Statute of this Court. In particular, reference is made to Article 6 – Genocide, Article 7 – Crimes Against Humanity, and Article 8 – War Crimes. International jurisdictions have addressed these matters with significant rulings in recent years, especially following October 7, 2023.

The International Court of Justice addressed the consequences of Israel’s unlawful occupation of the Palestinian Territories in its Advisory Opinion requested by the United Nations General Assembly on 19 July 2024. The Opinion concludes, among other things, that Israel’s policies and practices in the Palestinian territories constitute violations of international law, and that the continuation of Israel’s presence in those territories is illegal.

On 26 January 2024, the Court adopted an Order establishing urgent provisional measures, affirming, prima facie, its jurisdiction in the matter and obliging Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of acts referred to in Article II of the aforementioned Genocide Convention, in particular the killing of group members, infliction of serious bodily or mental harm to group members, deliberate infliction of conditions of life intended to bring about the group’s total or partial destruction, and measures aimed at preventing births within the group. For this purpose, Israel was required to ensure immediately that its Armed Forces would not commit such acts. Israel was also required to adopt all measures within its power to prevent and punish direct and public incitement to genocide, to provide urgent essential services and humanitarian assistance to address the dire living conditions of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, and to take effective measures to prevent destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence relating to acts covered by Articles II and III of the Genocide Convention. Israel has so far failed to comply with these requests, and the complicit support of other States, including Italy, has been decisive in this regard.

As the Court recalls in its Order, citing verbatim United Nations General Assembly Resolution 96/1 of 11 December 1946: “Genocide is the denial of the right to existence of entire human groups, just as murder is the denial of the right to life of individual human beings; this denial of the right to existence shocks the conscience of humanity, results in great losses to humanity in the form of cultural and other contributions represented by these human groups, and is contrary to moral law and to the spirit and purposes of the United Nations.”

On 28 March 2024, the Court reiterated that the dangerous situation existing in the Strip in light of recent developments requires the immediate and effective implementation of the measures indicated in the Order of 26 January. None of the measures requested have so far been adopted.

The existence of a genocide carried out using the means referenced in the International Convention was most recently reaffirmed by the report of the Independent International Commission of Experts on the Occupied Palestinian Territories of 16 September 2025, which, in paragraph 242, found that Israel had violated four of the criminal provisions set out in the 1948 United Nations Convention, in particular:

            “(i) killing members of the group; (ii) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (iii) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (iv) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.”

The International Criminal Court, for its part, issued on 21 November 2024 two arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, together with three Hamas leaders, all of whom have since been killed by Israel. The text of the arrest warrant for Netanyahu and Gallant is currently under seal. However, information regarding its content can be inferred from the response given by the Pre-Trial Chamber of this Court to Israel’s related appeal. From this text, it appears that the charges concern “war crimes, in particular the use of hunger and thirst (starvation) as methods of warfare, and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, as well as crimes against humanity, including killings, persecutions, and other acts.”

1. b) Italy’s Complicity in Israel’s Crimes

The issue of the participation of other States in the crimes committed is consistently addressed in the fundamental legal texts applicable to such crimes.

Given the fundamental nature of the norm prohibiting genocide, which undoubtedly constitutes a jus cogens rule—an imperative law from which no derogation is permitted and which imposes itself universally and unconditionally on all States, international actors other than States, and any other legal entities—Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide provides in a precise and detailed manner a series of prohibitions linked to the primary prohibition. These include the prohibition of conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide.

All States parties to this Convention bear, moreover—and it must be considered a customary obligation with the characteristics of jus cogens—the duty to prevent and punish genocide as set out in Article I of the Convention. In this regard, it is useful to briefly recall the conclusions reached by the Advisory Committee on Public International Law of the Dutch government, which established that:

1. Every third state that is a party to the Genocide Convention has an individual obligation to prevent genocide, wherever in the world there is a serious risk that genocide will be committed.
2. A third state has a duty to act, even if, on its own, it does not have the capacity to prevent genocide from taking place.
3. A third state may be held responsible for breaching the obligation to prevent genocide only if genocide actually takes place. The state incurs responsibility if it manifestly fails to take measures to prevent genocide.
4. The obligation to prevent genocide arises at the instant that the third state learns of, or should normally have learned of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed. If the ICJ determines that there is a real and imminent risk that rights under the Genocide Convention will be irreparably prejudiced, it may be assumed that a ‘serious risk of genocide’ exists.
5. The obligation to prevent genocide has a certain ‘gravity.’ This has implications for how the obligation to prevent genocide is fulfilled and for accountability for the measures taken. The third state can be expected to publicly render account for the way in which it has discharged its obligation to prevent genocide.
6. The duty that rests on the third state is a due diligence obligation and is dependent on its capacity to exert influence on persons likely to commit, or already committing, genocide. The state is required to employ all means reasonably available to it to prevent genocide. This will vary from state to state and from case to case.
7. Third states are required to take measures that are likely to have a deterrent effect on those suspected of committing or preparing to commit genocide. The capacity to exert influence depends on multiple factors. An assessment in concreto must be made in each case. As a rule, more can be expected of a third state that has strong ties and a good relationship with the state that is the source of the risk of genocide.
8. International law has no clear or fixed rules prescribing which measures should be taken to prevent genocide. Third states must assess on a case-by-case basis the adequacy and effectiveness of the measures to be taken. Measures of increasing severity can be taken, ranging from mild (diplomatic measures) to severe (retorsion and reprisals). If certain measures appear to lack a deterrent effect, the state concerned is required to take more far-reaching measures, provided it has the capability to do so.
9. Third states, when faced with comparable situations involving a serious risk of genocide, must be consistent in speaking out and taking measures.

The issue of the role of third states has been repeatedly addressed by competent international bodies. We refer here to the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024 (paras. 273–279) and to the repeatedly cited Independent International Commission of Experts on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, whose final recommendations directed to all UN Member States include:

            The Commission recommends that all Member States:

(a) Employ all means reasonably available to them to prevent the commission of genocide in the Gaza Strip;

(b) Cease the transfer of arms and other equipment or items, including jet fuel, to the State of Israel or third States where there is reason to suspect their use in military operations that have involved or could involve the commission of genocide;

(c) Ensure individuals and corporations in their territories and within their jurisdiction are not involved in the commission of genocide, aiding and assisting the commission of genocide or incitement to commit genocide, and investigate and prosecute those who may be implicated in these crimes under international law;

(d) Facilitate the investigations and domestic proceedings and take action (including imposing sanctions) against the State of Israel and against individuals or corporations that are involved in or facilitating the commission of genocide or incitement to commit genocide;

(e) Cooperate with the investigation of the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.

The Commission recommends that the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court:

(a) Examine, within its continuing investigation in the Situation in the State of Palestine, the crime of genocide for amendment to existing arrest warrants and addition to future application for arrest warrants;

(b) Examine the involvement of officials mentioned in this report for inclusion as those most responsible for international crimes committed in the occupied Palestinian territory.

The Italian government has not fulfilled these international obligations. Despite being fully able to influence the ongoing genocide—since, as argued, a significant portion of Israel’s available military equipment depends on it—it has so far completely abstained from taking any preventive measures and has, in fact, persistently continued to fuel it. This undeniable circumstance constitutes, in our view, an equally undeniable basis for the personal criminal responsibility of those holding decision-making power, as members of the Italian government or senior executives of companies directly involved in these crimes.

Article 25(3)(c) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court establishes that a person is criminally responsible if, for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, they aid, abet, or otherwise assist in its commission or attempted commission, including by providing the means for its commission. Subsection (d) further specifies that those who contribute in any other way to the commission or attempted commission of the crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose are also criminally liable.

International practice in general, and particularly the jurisprudence of this Court, offers numerous cases and precedents in which causal contributions, such as the provision of weapons and ammunition, have been considered sufficient to establish co-responsibility in the commission of international crimes. See, for example, the case of Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia, who was sentenced by the ICC to fifty years’ imprisonment for supporting the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone, having knowingly facilitated its commission of crimes.

The Italian government’s awareness of the criminal and genocidal nature of Israel’s military operations against the Palestinian population in Gaza and the West Bank arises ipso facto from the widespread notoriety of the events in question. The recent, albeit very late, admissions by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni regarding the illicit character of Israel’s actions confirm this awareness and, moreover, do not reflect any genuine remediation, as they were not accompanied by any effective decision to halt the transfer of military materials to Israel or to cease military cooperation with that State.

Both the provision of weapons, ammunition, and other military materials and services to Israel, and the interruption of support to the UNRWA humanitarian agency, clearly fall under these circumstances, constituting a manifest violation of Article III(e) of the Genocide Convention as well as Article 25(3) of the ICC Statute.

Further clarifications on the obligations of third states are also provided by the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024, according to which States are obliged to cooperate with the United Nations to ensure the restoration of international law violated by Israel and not to cooperate with Israel, particularly regarding its illicit activities in the occupied territories.

In its 30 April 2024 Order in the case of Nicaragua v. Germany, the ICJ reiterated (para. 23) that, under Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions, all States Parties are obligated to respect and ensure respect for these Conventions under all circumstances. In para. 24, the Court emphasized the importance of reminding States of their obligations regarding the transfer of arms to States involved in international conflicts, to prevent the risk that such weapons may be used to violate these Conventions.

More generally, the responsibility of a State for complicity in crimes committed by other States is clearly affirmed in Article 16 of the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001, UN International Law Commission), according to which:

            “A State that aids or assists another State in the commission of an internationally wrongful act by that State is internationally responsible for such conduct if: (a) that State acts with knowledge of the circumstances of the internationally wrongful act; and (b) the act would be internationally wrongful if committed by that State.”

It should be added that the fin de non recevoir hitherto invoked by the competent Italian criminal jurisdiction renders Article 17 of the ICC Statute applicable, requiring the application of the principle of complementarity between the ICC and national jurisdictions. This principle highlights the absence of any genuine intention by the Italian State to “truly carry out investigations or criminal proceedings.”

4. Responsible Parties

The various activities supporting Israel in the implementation of its criminal plan aimed at violating the rights of the Palestinian population up to its total or partial destruction clearly imply the decision-making role of the Italian government, which oversees the conduct of foreign policy decisions and their executive implementation. To assert that this decision-making sphere is exempt from judicial scrutiny because it reflects indisputable sovereign powers would amount to declaring this Court—and indeed any judicial oversight mechanism—completely useless.

More generally, such a position would imply the existence of a free and discretionary political sphere, exempt from any constraints or obligations, even when, as in the tragic case at hand, the human rights of affected populations are massively and gravely violated, thereby irreparably undermining the very idea of an international legal order.

This is particularly relevant concerning decisions on authorizing the transfer of armaments, which under Italian law are reserved to the Prime Minister and the Ministers of Defense, Foreign Affairs, and Economy. Italian Law No. 185 of 1990 assigns these responsibilities to the Prime Minister and the Ministers of Defense and Foreign Affairs, making their accountability absolutely fundamental. Added to this are responsibilities related to the oversight of public companies such as Leonardo, which, although a joint-stock company, has decisive public participation. With regard to Leonardo, it is also necessary to emphasize the concurrent responsibilities of its CEO and General Manager, Roberto Cingolani, who holds significant decision-making powers relevant to the actions under scrutiny here.

It should also be recalled that, by authorizing the transfer of arms to Israel, the Italian government violated not only international law but also its own national legislation, particularly laws governing arms transfers, which explicitly prohibit transfers to States engaged in conflicts or responsible for serious human rights violations.

This violation of precise legal provisions, as well as the arguably more serious violation of customary and treaty-based international law defining international crimes—including those enshrined in the Statute of this Court—renders inapplicable any defense based on the identification between individuals and the institutions they serve in order to exclude personal responsibility of the involved ministers.

Among the institutional figures to be prosecuted are those at the highest levels who intervene in authorizing arms transfers and other activities that constitute a concrete and effective contribution to the ongoing massacres, including the decision to halt funding to UNRWA. This includes the Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni; the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Antonio Tajani; and the Minister of Defense, Guido Crosetto. The first two are jointly responsible for the government’s international decisions, and the third for his specific competence regarding arms exports and military cooperation.

Their official roles do not prevent criminal proceedings against them, pursuant to Article 27 of the ICC Statute, which states:

1. This Statute applies equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, the official capacity of Head of State or Government, member of a government or parliament, elected representative, or agent of a State shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it in itself constitute a ground for reduction of sentence.
2. Immunities or special procedural rules attached to the official capacity of a person under national or international law do not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over that person.

Article IV of the Genocide Convention also explicitly provides that:

            Persons committing genocide or any of the acts listed in Article III (including acts of complicity) shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials, or private individuals.

No immunity can be claimed based on the alleged “political nature” of the acts performed, since, under a State governed by law and in an international legal order, such a characterization does not permit acts contrary to fundamental principles or in violation of norms of the highest importance, such as those prohibiting and punishing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. To claim otherwise would effectively nullify all international regulations designed to prevent and punish the gravest crimes.

No question arises in this regard with respect to Roberto Cingolani, who manages a private enterprise, albeit publicly owned.

5. Evidence

The evidence supporting the claims made in this complaint is contained in United Nations documents and reports, reports from organizations specialized in analyzing arms trade and trafficking, statements from Italian government authorities, parliamentary inquiries, and press articles. These are included or referenced in the annex to the complaint, together with the complaint previously submitted to the Rome Prosecutor’s Office and its subsequent supplements.

6. Conclusions and Request

In light of the above, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court is requested to:

1. Initiate a preliminary examination pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute.
2. Assess the possibility of opening a formal investigation.

Signatories

1. Maurizio Acerbo, former parliamentarian
2. Alessandra Algostino, Full Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Turin
3. Stefano Andrade Fajardo, Lawyer
4. Pino Arlacchi, former UN Under-Secretary-General
5. Michela Arricale, Lawyer
6. Stefania Ascari, Member of Parliament
7. Martina Bianchi, Lawyer
8. Giorgio Cremaschi, Trade Unionist
9. Angelo D’Orsi, Historian
10. Luigi De Magistris, former magistrate and MEP
11. Benedetto Vittorio De Maio, Lawyer
12. Emanuele Dessì, former MP
13. Alessandro Di Battista, Journalist and former MP
14. Luca Di Gloria, Lawyer
15. Veronica Dini, Lawyer
16. Domenico Gallo, former magistrate
17. Fausto Gianelli, Lawyer
18. Claudio Giangiacomo, Lawyer
19. Ugo Giannangeli, Lawyer
20. Nicola Giudice, Lawyer
21. Marco Guercio, Lawyer
22. Muna Khorzom, Jurist
23. Pierpaolo Leonardi, Trade Union Executive
24. Fabio Marcelli, Lawyer, former Research Director, Director of CNR Institute of International Legal Studies
25. Ugo Mattei, Full Professor of Civil Law, University of Turin

26.

Tomaso Montanari, Rector of the University for Foreigners of Siena

26. Carlo Augusto Melis Costa, Lawyer
27. Laura Morante, Actress and Director
28. Luisa Morgantini, former MEP
29. Moni Ovadia, Actor and Singer
30. Luigi Paccione, Lawyer
31. Gilberto Pagani, Lawyer
32. Paola Palmieri, Trade Unionist and Member of the National Council for Economy and Labour
33. Francesca Perri, Physician
34. Michela Poletti, Lawyer
35. Dario Rossi, Lawyer
36. Flavio Rossi Albertini, Lawyer
37. Franco Russo, former MP
38. Giovanni Russo Spena, University Professor and former MP
39. Arturo Salerni, Lawyer
40. Luca Saltalamacchia, Lawyer
41. Alessandro Somma, Full Professor of Comparative Law at Sapienza University of Rome
42. Barbara Spinelli, Lawyer
43. Francesco Staccioli, Trade Unionist
44. Francesca Trasatti, Lawyer
45. Gianluca Vitale, Lawyer