Former prosecutor calls for EU statute blocking US sanctions on ICC members

Former ICC Prosecutor Urges EU to Block U.S. Sanctions on Court Members

Former prosecutor calls for EU statute - In a pointed critique of U.S. actions, Fatou Bensouda, the former chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), has urged the European Union to enact a binding statute that would shield ICC members from coercive sanctions. Her remarks, delivered at a Rights Forum meeting in The Hague, highlighted what she called “aggressive” measures by Washington aimed at undermining the court’s independence and effectiveness. Bensouda’s call for a unified European legal framework underscores growing concerns about the politicization of international justice and the potential for economic pressure to overshadow legal accountability.

The Sanctions in Context

The controversy erupted in February 2025 when the United States imposed sanctions on 11 ICC officials, including nine judges and the former chief prosecutor, as well as three Palestinian organizations. These measures, which encompassed travel restrictions and asset freezes, were a direct response to the ICC’s 2024 decision to issue arrest warrants for senior Israeli government figures, notably Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The U.S. argued that the court’s actions had overstepped their authority by targeting Israeli nationals without prior consent from the country’s leadership.

Bensouda, who served as ICC prosecutor from 2012 to 2021, emphasized the impact of these sanctions on the personal and professional lives of judges and other court personnel. “The sanctions have effectively barred them from accessing the European financial system,” she said. “This creates a situation where their ability to live normal lives is compromised, and their families face economic hardship as a result.” By isolating ICC members financially, she claimed, the U.S. is attempting to exert control over the court’s operations and erode its credibility as an impartial body.

Bensouda’s Criticisms

“These are coercive attempts to interfere with the independent exercise of judicial and prosecutorial functions established under international law. If the international community does not respond with seriousness, institutional resolve and practical solidarity, the consequences will extend far beyond The Hague.”

Bensouda accused the U.S. of using sanctions as a tool to bully ICC officials, transforming legal disagreements into economic warfare. “The use of such instruments against prosecutors, judges, or court staff engaged in their duties represents a profound distortion of international law,” she stated. “It is not just a matter of disagreement but an effort to cripple the court’s ability to pursue justice for the most severe crimes.”

She also criticized the ICC’s affiliated states, particularly those in the European Union, for their “slow and timid reactions” to the sanctions. “Instead of standing up for the court, many states have remained passive, offering only symbolic support without taking concrete steps to defend its members,” Bensouda said. “This inaction risks allowing the U.S. to dictate the terms of international justice.” Her concerns were heightened by the fact that the Netherlands, as the ICC’s host country, has been accused of failing to adequately protect judges from the financial and reputational damage caused by the sanctions.

The Netherlands and International Solidarity

The Dutch government has committed to safeguarding the ICC’s operations through a formal agreement, pledging to ensure the security and safety of court personnel. However, progressive members of parliament in the Netherlands argue that the coalition government has not fulfilled this promise in practice. “The government has provided lip service to the ICC’s mission, but it has done little to shield its judges from the economic pressure being applied,” one MP noted. “The burden now falls on other nations, such as Spain, to step in and provide support.”

Bensouda acknowledged the efforts of the Netherlands and other allies but stressed that they must do more. “The ICC’s survival depends on the collective action of states,” she said. “Moral solidarity is important, but without operational measures, the institution will struggle to maintain its integrity.” Her remarks reflect a broader debate about the role of the EU in supporting international legal institutions and countering unilateral actions by powerful nations.

Preparing for Institutional Sanctions

Bensouda warned that the U.S. is not only targeting individuals but also preparing to impose sanctions on the ICC itself as an institution. “We must ask ourselves an uncomfortable question,” she said. “What happens when highly qualified professionals conclude that serving at the ICC is too risky for their personal and financial well-being?” She painted a scenario where banks, insurers, and technology providers might withdraw support, and external experts could hesitate to engage with the court, fearing political repercussions.

“This is not hypothetical,” Bensouda added. “It is a real threat to the ICC’s ability to function. If sanctions become a standard tool of judicial intimidation, the court’s independence will be at risk.” Her vision for resistance includes “structural mechanisms” to counteract these pressures, such as legal protections, financial safeguards, and coordinated defense strategies among state parties.

Calling for Operational Solidarity

In a plea for collective action, Bensouda proposed that the EU should trigger its blocking statute to prevent the enforcement of U.S. sanctions on ICC members. “States must establish concrete measures to protect the court and its personnel,” she said. “This includes creating secure financial channels and legal frameworks that insulate them from politically motivated pressures.” Her call for operational solidarity highlights the need for practical support beyond rhetorical commitments.

The ICC’s Rome Statute, which forms the basis of its authority, requires states to cooperate with the court’s legal processes. Bensouda argued that the U.S. has manipulated this framework to justify its sanctions, framing them as necessary to counter the court’s perceived bias. “The U.S. has distorted the purpose of sanctions, turning them into instruments of coercion rather than justice,” she said. “This undermines the principles of international law and sets a dangerous precedent.”

Bensouda’s remarks also touched on the broader implications for the ICC’s future. “If sanctions become normalized, the court’s credibility will be compromised,” she warned. “Judges and prosecutors may begin to fear the consequences of their work, and the institution’s ability to hold powerful actors accountable will weaken.” Her vision for the ICC includes not only legal and financial protection but also a commitment to maintaining its role as a beacon of justice in global affairs.

As the debate over the ICC’s independence continues, Bensouda’s call for EU action serves as a reminder of the challenges faced by international institutions in the face of geopolitical pressure. The sanctions imposed by the U.S. have sparked a renewed push for solidarity among member states, with the hope that collective efforts can shield the ICC from becoming a casualty of political conflict. For now, the focus remains on ensuring that the court’s mission to pursue justice is not overshadowed by the economic and diplomatic tactics of powerful nations.