Join us in condemning US Sanctions against the International Criminal Court
- Mariana Goetz
- Oct 3, 2025
- 3 min read
New reports in the Financial Times, Reuters and elsewhere indicate that we are about to see another wave of US sanctions against the International Criminal Court (ICC) or its personnel.
Days after he was in Office for his second term, on 6 February 2025, US President Trump issued Executive Order 14203, authorising sanctions on the ICC. The language used designates:
"foreign persons engaged in certain malign efforts by the ICC and aims to impose tangible and significant consequences on those directly engaged in the ICC’s transgressions against the United States and Israel."
Initially, just the ICC top Prosecutor, Karim Ahmed Khan, a British barrister, was designated under the Order. Four judges were then added on 5 June 2025, namely Beti Hohler from Slovenia, Reine Alapini-Gansou from Benin, Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza from Peru, and Solome Bossa from Uganda.
It is feared that further sanctions will now target the Court as an entity, in addition to further personal designations. The sanctions impose obligations on US entities to block and freeze assets or interests in assets. It imposes a travel ban to the US and also prohibits U.S. persons (individuals and entities, including companies and their subsidiaries) from providing funds, goods, or services to, or for the benefit of, any designated individual. This effectively cuts off access to U.S. banking, payment systems, credit‑card networks, and use of services provided by US tech companies, including Microsoft.
Rights for Peace proudly joined over 150 organisations condemning the threats of further US Sanctions against the Court in a statement on 22 September 2025. The sanctions against the ICC are a threat to the very concept of an international legal order and respect for human rights - and go to the core of our efforts to prevent and punish the most heinous crimes that are of international concern. This is not just a matter for lawyers and the human rights community, but also integral to prevention and peace building efforts.
Why the ICC matters for peace
Many debates around the International Criminal Court focus on prosecution, deterrence, or geopolitics. From a peace perspective, we see three interwoven roles that make the ICC indispensable:
Accountability as deterrent and precedent
In contexts of atrocity, impunity emboldens perpetrators, undermines trust in institutions, and perpetuates cycles of violence. The ICC is one of the critical mechanisms by which we affirm that no one is above the law — not even states or generals. Without that standard, any peace agreement risks leaving crimes unresolved and grievances festering.
Justice as recognition and empowerment for for survivors
Peace is hollow if it ignores or erases harms. Survivors — and their communities — deserve recognition, redress, and the promise of a system that listens. An ICC unaffected by political coercion helps maintain that promise. Its existence gives voice to victims in spaces often dominated by power.
Structural constraints on power
The ICC is not a panacea. But in a world where powerful states or non-state actors can act wantonly, international justice institutions can articulate international norms and impose constraints. When nations threaten to sanction or dismantle those institutions, the signal is clear: they believe themselves exempt. Upholding the ICC is, in effect, defending the norms that limit abuse in the first place.
A call to the peace community
We invite peace organisations, mediators, conflict transformation networks, faith groups, and civil society everywhere to:
Speak out: International justice is not for human rights organisations to uphold alone. Governments, politicians, academics, peace practitioners in particular should affirm that justice is an integral to durable peace.
Connect justice, repair and development: Embed accountability in peacebuilding and development programs — in how we design transitional justice, reparations, memory, and institutional reform all reinforce international justice frameworks.
Resist polarisation: Some critique the ICC as selective or biased. These criticisms deserve serious engagement — but are not reason for attacking an the Rome Statute system ratified by 125 countries.
The decision to sanction or undermine the ICC is not a distant legal dispute. It is a choice about what world we want — one where powerful actors are above accountability, or one where peace is grounded in justice. As Rights for Peace, we affirm our commitment: we will act, alongside others, not only to save the ICC, but to defend the deeper principle it represents — that peace without justice is unstable, and justice without peace is incomplete.
Photo credit: UN Photo/Rick Bajornas. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
Comments