Dr. Ali Karbalaei Hosseini – International Law Researcher

The move came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Trump at the White House. Netanyahu has been wanted by the ICC since October 2023 on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The sanctions include financial and visa restrictions on individuals who participate in the ICC’s investigations against American citizens or its allies. Trump’s move not only threatens the Court’s functioning but also demonstrates the United States’ approach to confronting international institutions and international law.

Reasons for the US and Israel not being members of the Court

The United States and Israel have not joined the Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the Court, and have consistently opposed the Court’s investigation into the situation in Palestine. The Rome Statute was adopted in 2002 and established the ICC as the first permanent international institution to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. However, the United States and Israel have refused to join the treaty for various reasons.

One of the main reasons in this regard is the concern that the Court would prosecute their citizens and military personnel. The United States, citing the principle of complementarity, as stated in Article 17 of the Rome Statute, claims that its domestic judicial system can prosecute crimes committed by its citizens. In addition, the United States and Israel take advantage of the fact that they do not recognize Palestine as an independent state and use this as an excuse not to accept the Court’s jurisdiction over crimes committed in the Palestinian territories.

US Actions Against International Institutions

Trump’s recent sanctions against the ICC are just another example of Washington’s hostile approach to international institutions. The country had previously limited cooperation with the ICC by passing the American Service Members Protection Act (ASPA) in 2002. It even authorized the use of military force to free American citizens wanted by the ICC. This law, also known as the “Hague Invasion Act,” reflects the US’s increasingly hostile approach to international institutions.

Trump’s actions not only threaten the ICC but could have broader implications for the institution’s other investigations into international crimes. The ICC is currently investigating crimes committed in 16 different regions, including Darfur, Ukraine, Venezuela, Afghanistan, and Myanmar. US sanctions could affect countries’ cooperation with the ICC and disrupt the process of investigating international crimes.

Implications of Sanctions for International Law

Trump’s sanctions against the ICC are seen as an attack on the institution and international law. As an independent and impartial institution, the ICC plays an important role in delivering international justice and holding perpetrators of serious international crimes accountable. US sanctions could weaken the institution and reduce the international community’s trust.

In addition, these measures could serve as a model for other countries to use similar tools to confront international institutions when faced with international investigations. This could weaken the international legal system and reduce the international community’s ability to respond to international crimes.

Solutions to Counter Sanctions

To counter the effects of US sanctions, the ICC member states can use various tools. One of these tools is the EU Blocking Statute. The law, which aims to protect EU companies and individuals from cross-border sanctions by third countries, could act as a shield to protect the Court from US sanctions. It would ensure that service providers in the EU can cooperate with the Court without worrying about US sanctions.

In addition, the EU could create an independent financial system that would allow the Court’s staff to operate without being dependent on the US dollar system. This would neutralize the impact of US sanctions and allow the Court to continue its work.

On the other hand, the Court could prosecute Trump and other US officials responsible for the sanctions for obstruction of justice under Article 70 of the Rome Statute. While this would not lead to Trump’s arrest, it could impose travel restrictions on him and other US officials. For example, after the Court issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2022, he refused to travel to many countries.

Conclusion

Trump’s sanctions against the ICC are not only a threat to this international institution but also reflect the United States’ approach to confronting international law and multilateral institutions. These actions could weaken the international justice system and reduce accountability for perpetrators of international crimes. However, the Court’s member states and the international community can use legal and financial tools to protect the institution and respond to US sanctions. Preserving the Court’s independence and functioning is not only essential for the realization of international justice but also demonstrates the international community’s commitment to human rights and accountability.