ICC under siege from US and Africa

The world made its support for international justice clear by adopting the statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC) on 17 July 1998 in Rome. The adoption of the Rome Statute was a landmark moment in the wake of genocides in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and wars ravaging Kosovo, Afghanistan and the DRC, writes Ottilia Maunganidze, head of special projects at the Institute for Security Studies (ISS). ‘So much hope rode on a permanent court with international jurisdiction designed to deter conflict, crimes against humanity and genocide,’ Maunganidze recalls. Yet, 28 years later, the ICC and international justice are in crisis – and hope for universal accountability is shrouded by the ICC’s challenges. She notes the US has threatened to dismantle the court, and Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have submitted notices to withdraw from its statute (And Chad on Friday also gave notice to quit the global court – see Regional section above). ‘Add to that an embattled ICC prosecutor, delays and cases collapsing due to non-co-operation and other targeted efforts to undermine the court’s work,’ she writes in News24. On 13 July, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a ‘sweeping campaign to dismantle the threat posed by the ICC to US sovereignty’. The campaign promises to ‘systematically disable the ICC’s ability to operate’. Maunganidze explains the move has been widely criticised and reignited debates about international justice and the ICC’s role in ensuring accountability for grave human rights violations. She notes recent ICC cases against Israeli leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity hardened Washington’s position. ‘US President Donald Trump’s February 2025 executive order described ICC investigations as “illegitimate and politically motivated”. His administration has since imposed sanctions on ICC judges and prosecutors involved in the cases,’ she writes. Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso accuse the court of unfairly targeting Africa and serving as an instrument of neo-colonialist repression. Rebuttals from the court’s supporters are consistent. ‘But the current anti-ICC onslaught demands more than rebuttals and solidarity. It requires states that support the rule of law and accountability to be more assertive,’ she argues.

Maunganidze adds the ICC isn’t meant to be the sole court adjudicating international crimes. ‘In a world where states investigated, prosecuted and adjudicated such crimes themselves, the court would operate only in exceptional cases – when states are unable or unwilling to act,’ she explains on News24. Maunganidze argues being more assertive also involves states ensuring accountability themselves, whether alone or collectively. It also requires law associations, NGOs and civil society to push back against backsliding. ‘Many efforts to advance justice are lost in the noise of attacks on institutions like the ICC. Support for the ratification of the crime of aggression is one example. Others include new international justice instruments, such as the Ljubljana-The Hague Convention (adopted in 2023) and the Draft Articles on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity (adoption expected by 2029),’ she writes. In Africa, there are glimmers of hope. ‘Many African countries, including states not party to the ICC statute, like Ethiopia and Zimbabwe, have domestic laws criminalising war crimes and genocide, enabling domestic prosecutions,’ Maunganidze explains. Last month, the Central African Republic’s hybrid Special Criminal Court opened the trial of former President François Bozizé and his co-accused, Eugène Barret Ngaïkosset, Vianney Semndiro and Firmin Junior Danboy, for crimes against humanity. Meanwhile, the DRC has formed a new international advisory council of senior war crimes lawyers to support its push for accountability for atrocities in its ongoing conflict. She adds SA has galvanised support for its case against Israel at the ICJ, focusing on the Genocide Convention. Eighteen countries have submitted interventions backing its case, while another 14 have voiced support. Maunganidze argues the ICC may be under threat, but the international justice system mustn’t crumble as a result. ‘Wider efforts to advance accountability for international crimes are a reminder the global justice system extends far beyond the ICC,’ she writes.