‘Betrayal of international law’: US sanctions on ICC draw widespread condemnation
US President Donald Trump’s administration imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Friday, hours after one of its former judges won the Nobel Peace Prize, putting Washington on a diplomatic collision course with European allies. The court denounced the move as an “assault on the rule of law and on the very foundations of the international legal order” and called on its 125 member states to take action to defend it. “The Court cannot stand alone. Its fate now rests also in the hands of the states that created it,” the ICC said in a statement, adding that the issue was about safeguarding the international order grounded in the rule of law. “The Court will continue to fully discharge its mandate, with independence and impartiality, acting only on the basis of the law and the evidence, for the sake of the countless victims of grave crimes,” it said. The move drew widespread condemnation from governments, human rights activists and international organisations, including the United Nations. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres condemned the US announcement of sanctions against the ICC as an institution. In a statement, he said “accountability for international crimes and the delivery of justice to victims were central to the global commitment to peace, security, human rights and fundamental freedoms”. UN Guterres reiterated his unwavering support for the independence of the court and its officials. The foreign ministry of Canada, Denmark, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement opposing the sanctions. “As committed supporters of the ICC we regret and strongly disagree with the announcement of sanctions to be imposed upon the Court by the United States,” the statement said, as shared by Germany’s Foreign Office on X. The ministers also welcomed the court’s preparations to ensure it could continue to fulfil its mandate under the Rome Statute, reaffirming their support for its work. Japan also issued a statement backing the court, joining the other countries in opposing the US move and reiterating its support for the ICC’s ability to carry out its mandate. Belgium condemned the sanctions, saying “the ICC must be able to operate independently”. It called for the activation of the European Union’s Blocking Statute to protect the court. Human rights advocates warned that the sanctions threatened justice for victims of abuses in Palestine, Ukraine, Myanmar and Sudan, describing the move as “an unprecedented assault on global justice and the rule of law”. European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas described the ICC as the “cornerstone of the international criminal justice system”. She said she had spoken with ICC President Tomoko Akane following Washington’s announcement, adding that the six-month period before the sanctions take effect offered an opportunity for dialogue. “The EU has always supported the Court, and the EU has options to ensure that it can continue its vital work,” Kallas said, adding that protecting the ICC remained an EU priority. The United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs also condemned the sanctions in a post on X, saying: “The UK stands with the International Criminal Court and we stand united with our partners in strongly disagreeing with sanctions imposed on the Court. “The ICC must be permitted to continue its critical work holding perpetrators of the most horrific international crimes to account.” Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard criticised the sanctions, describing the move as “a betrayal” of the principles of international criminal law. In a post on X, she urged European governments to “impose immediately blocking orders” to prevent the sanctions from being implemented on European territory. The US Treasury announced the sanctions with a six-month initial grace period, and some other exemptions that would allow some transactions for telecoms, software, payment of pensions and transactions related to detainees. Rubio said the sanctions had been structured to give the court and its member states an opportunity to address US concerns, and would be adjusted if those demands were not met. Washington has denounced the ICC over arrest warrants issued for Israeli officials including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and an investigation into actions of US soldiers in Afghanistan, which the ICC says is “deprioritised.
A decision by the administration of United States President Donald Trump to place sanctions on the International Criminal Court has sparked swift international backlash from foreign governments, international bodies, and civil society groups.
The court responded with sharp criticism, labelling the measures an assault on legal norms and the core structure of the global legal framework. Urging its 125 member states to rally in its defence, the institution declared that it cannot stand on its own and stated that its survival now depends on the countries that established it. It pledged to maintain its work impartially and independently on behalf of victims of major atrocities.
Under the measures announced by the US Treasury, financial assets of court staff would be frozen, and personnel alongside their immediate family members would be barred from entering the country. The policy introduces a six-month delay before full enforcement, alongside carve-outs permitting specific dealings related to telecommunications, computing software, pension distributions, and matters involving detainees. US official Rubio indicated that the transitional window is intended to allow the tribunal and its signatories time to address American grievances, warning that the measures could be modified if those expectations are not addressed.
Washington has frequently objected to the court's actions, particularly its arrest warrants targeting Israeli figures such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, alongside an inquiry into the actions of American military personnel in Afghanistan, a case the court has described as deprioritised.
The punitive steps drew condemnation across the international diplomatic sphere. A joint communique signed by foreign ministries from Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom expressed deep regret and strong opposition to the American action, reaffirming their steadfast backing for the tribunal's mission under the Rome Statute.
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres strongly denounced the sanctions on the institution, asserting that pursuing accountability for international crimes and delivering justice remain vital to global commitments on peace and fundamental rights. He reiterated his firm backing for the court's autonomy.
Within the European Union, foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas characterised the court as a bedrock of global criminal justice. Following discussions with court President Tomoko Akane, Kallas noted that the six-month grace window presents an opening for diplomatic engagement, while affirming that European officials possess tools to safeguard the institution's operations. Belgium specifically called for the activation of the bloc's Blocking Statute to shield the tribunal, while Britain's foreign secretary reaffirmed that perpetrators of grave atrocities must be held to account.
Human rights organisations echoed the outrage, warning that the sanctions undermine accountability efforts for victims in Sudan, Myanmar, Ukraine, and Palestine. Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard branded the action a betrayal of international law principles and appealed to European leaders to immediately introduce blocking mechanisms to neutralise the sanctions within their territories.
Spotted an error? Report it · Editorial standards · Corrections policy
Source & verification
VerifiedReported from Dawn (Pakistan).
Get breaking news alerts and the Morning Briefing
Verified stories in your inbox, every one linked to its sources. All newsletters →