On August 20, 2025, the United States imposed sanctions on four senior officials of the International Criminal Court (ICC), drawing sharp criticism from the Court and its member states. The unprecedented move, which targets two judges and two deputy prosecutors, has been described as a direct attack on judicial independence.
Who was sanctioned?
The US State Department announced restrictions on Judges Kimberly Prost (Canada) and Nicolas Guillou (France), along with deputy prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan (Fiji) and Mame Mandiaye Niang (Senegal). Under Executive Order 14203, their assets in the US are frozen, and American citizens and companies are barred from engaging with them.
Washington accused the officials of “illegitimate actions” for backing investigations into alleged US war crimes in Afghanistan and supporting arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and ex-Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. “These sanctions send a clear signal: politically motivated legal actions against Americans and Israelis will carry consequences,” the State Department said.
ICC and allies hit back
The ICC dismissed the sanctions as a “flagrant attack” on its independence, warning that such measures undermine its ability to prosecute war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. The Assembly of States Parties (ASP), which represents the Court’s 124 member nations, echoed the condemnation. It called Washington’s move “an affront to the integrity of the Rome Statute system” and cautioned that it could weaken global accountability efforts.
Rising tensions
This marks the second round of US sanctions against the Court this year, following similar measures against ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan in February. In total, eight ICC officials are now blacklisted. While the US has never joined the Rome Statute, the Court retains jurisdiction over crimes committed on member state territories—covering conflicts like Afghanistan and Palestine. That has repeatedly set Washington on a collision course with The Hague.
What’s at stake?
Critics argue the sanctions deepen the divide between the US and much of the international community, with human rights groups accusing Washington of shielding its nationals and allies from accountability. In a defiant response, the ASP reaffirmed “full support” for the Court, urging member states to protect its independence.
As pressure mounts, the future of international justice may hinge on whether the ICC can withstand US pushback—or whether Washington’s power reshapes the global pursuit of accountability.
