The Marmara ship situation, the subject of an attack by the Israel military on the ICC, referred to by the flag state has been rejected and archived by the ICC Prosecutor. This action of the prosecutor is in the light of the requirements set forth in Article 53 of the Statute, which must identify the rationale for the situation referred. If the prosecutor finds a reasonable basis, he/she will start an investigation, otherwise will file it. From this point of view, it is important to study the dimensions of the prosecutor’s approach in the judicial procedure regarding the condition of the Marmara ship. The research method in this paper is descriptive-analytical and critical. The main question of the research is what is the achievement of the judicial procedure based on the legal mechanism in forcing the prosecutor to reconsider the status of the Marmara ship referred by the flag state against the Israel regime? The findings show that the prosecutor's response to the situation referred by the flag state believes that there is no criterion for the severity of the crime, while the Comoros state believes that the Israeli military's attacks on the flag ship and its crew are enough severity that to be prosecuted in the ICC. Accordingly, the ICC’s judges found that the prosecutor's assessment of the lack of a reasonable basis was inconsistent with the circumstances of the situation. The prosecutor was asked to reconsider his previous decision. However, the judicial procedure has shown that the prosecutor obligation lacks a guarantee of performance and achievement and does not mean that a preliminary investigation into the criminal situation has been started. This implies the ineffectiveness of Article 53(3)(a) of the Statute and the referring State right to object for the prosecution of international crimes in the ICC.