The arrest warrants issued today against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defense Minister Yoav Gallad and the head of Hamas’ armed wing, Mohamed Deif, represent a historic development for the International Criminal Court, which has struggled for 22 years to be recognized its powers and to acquire powers of enforcement of its decisions.

The Court, of which they are members 124 countries (soon to be 125 after Ukraine signed the Rome Statute, its founding treaty), is based in The Hague, Netherlands and its mission is to prosecute the perpetrators of the most serious crimes committed around the world when countries do not have the will or the possibility to do it themselves.

Although convictions are rare, the mere fact of prosecuting those who allegedly committed atrocities sends a message: that the international community is determined to fight against the impunity of the perpetrators.

After its establishment in 2002, the ICC has taken over 32 war crimes casescrimes against humanity, genocide and failure to deliver justice. Fourteen of these cases (about 40%) are still pending, essentially because the suspects remain at large. But, with no police force of its own, the Court has little chance of arresting them quickly.

Of the 56 arrest warrants issued since 2002, only 21 have been executed. The ICC leaves it up to its member countries to arrest suspects. But countries often don’t cooperate because the Court “doesn’t offer them anything in return, except justice,” commented Pascal Tourlan, a former adviser to the Court.

The wanted list includes from Russian President Vladimir Putin – for war crimes linked to the invasion of Ukraine – to Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony.

Russia and dozens of other countries, including the US, Israel and China, do not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction, making the Court’s investigations of their citizens difficult. Other countries also defy the ICC, refusing to hand over suspects to it. For example, in early September Putin was received with honors in Mongolia, which is nevertheless a member of the ICC.

“When countries don’t like what the ICC is doing, they often don’t cooperateNancy Combs, a law professor at William & Mary School of Law in Virginia, emphasized.

But the court’s role is not to try all alleged war criminals but to “encourage countries to deal with their own affairs,” insisted its spokesman, Fadi El-Abdallah.

Each case comes with a range of unique challenges, from national government interference to witness intimidation. This is how the process against the current president of Kenya, William Ruto, was overturned when he was still the vice president of his country in 2016.

These difficulties partly explain the low rate of convictions. The Court acquitted four defendants and found 12 guilty. The last was a jihadist, a former Islamist police chief in Tobuktu, Mali, who was convicted on Wednesday of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The other convictions mainly involved government officials in the war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo.

In the early years, some African countries such as Uganda, Cote d’Ivoire and DR Congo themselves approached the ICC asking it to investigate their internal conflicts. Other cases were referred to the ICC by the UN Security Council. “Non-African countries have strongly resisted the jurisdiction of the ICC,” commented Nancy Combs.

With the warrant of arrest against of Netanyahu, the Court turns for the first time against a leader of a country that is traditionally supported by the West, and this event caused outrage in Israel.

It is unlikely that Netanyahu or the Hamas leaders will soon be brought to justice in The Hague. They could be arrested if they travel to, for example, Britain, France or another country that recognizes the ICC. But even in this case the chances of conviction are zero.

Combs, however, believes that ICC investigations could have a deterrent effect and moral importance. “The point is to do what we think is right above all, even if we know that in the short term things will not change“, he explained.