The Int’l Criminal Court faces American sanctions

Malkangiri Ravi Kumar

Raphael Lemkin, a Polish lawyer, came up with the word “genocide” in the 1940s. He probably never thought that the idea of punishing crimes against humanity would be attacked politically eighty years later. Lemkin’s tireless efforts to get the world to recognize genocide as a crime led to the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, which is now a key part of international humanitarian law.

Genocide has been going on for a long time, from the Biblical exterminations and the Armenian massacres to the Holocaust, Rwanda, and Bosnia. The suffering of the Rohingyas in Myanmar and the Palestinians in Gaza today makes us wonder if people have really learned from their mistakes.

On November 21, 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague issued arrest warrants for two of Israel’s most important leaders: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. During the Gaza conflict, they are accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity, such as using starvation as a weapon of war. The warrants were a historic event because they were the first time the leader of a democracy that was aligned with the West had to go to the ICC.

According to the Rome Statute, all 125 countries that signed it, including Britain and France, must arrest the accused if they come to their country. It’s a different story if any state will actually do it.

Around the world, judges, human rights groups, and academics have all raised the alarm about what many call a genocidal campaign in Gaza. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and more than 20 UN special rapporteurs have all spoken out against Israel’s military actions and humanitarian blockade.

The US and the ICC have never gotten along well. In 2000, President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute but never sent it to the Senate because he was “concerned about jurisdiction and sovereignty.” George W. Bush, who took over for him, went even further and officially withdrew U.S. support. He was afraid that American soldiers could be charged with crimes while they were overseas.

Even so, Washington has only sometimes worked with the Court, like when it funded special tribunals like the one for Sierra Leone and sometimes supported ICC referrals through the UN Security Council. In short, the US backs the idea of international justice, but only if it doesn’t apply to the US or its close allies.

The most recent fight started when the ICC looked into what Israel was doing in Gaza. The U.S. government quickly condemned the Court’s decision, saying it was “illegitimate and politically motivated.” The ICC does not have any authority over citizens of either Israel or the United States, according to Washington.

Donald Trump, who was then President, signed an executive order in February 2025 that allowed important ICC officials, such as Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan and judges in charge of the Afghanistan and Palestine cases, to be punished.

Al Haq, Al Mezan, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights were also put on a blacklist for “supporting investigations against Israeli nationals.” The order said that anyone or any group that gave “financial or technical assistance” to the ICC could be fined or sent to jail.

A lot of people in the international legal community were shocked by these moves. For the first time, a major power used its own laws to punish an independent international court, which is supposed to hold people accountable for war crimes and genocide.

The Court in The Hague is under more pressure than ever before. Some American-linked NGOs have reportedly stopped working with it because they are afraid of getting back at it. Staff members are worried that going to the U.S. could get them arrested.

More than 120 civil society groups sent a letter to world governments asking them to protect the ICC’s independence. The letter said that “such sanctions would abandon countless victims” and “weaponize the global financial system to strangle the Court’s work.”

Judge Tomoko Akane, the president of the ICC, called the sanctions a “serious attack on the rule-based international order and on millions of victims waiting for justice.” Officials from the European Union also spoke out against the move, saying that weakening the ICC only gives war criminals more power.

Washington has had problems with the ICC before. The Trump administration put similar sanctions in place in 2020 after the court started looking into claims of U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan. In 2021, the Biden administration lifted those restrictions, which led to a short return to cooperation. But the most recent round of sanctions could bring the U.S. back into open conflict with the organization it helped create.

People who don’t like this say that it shows a double standard: when the ICC goes after leaders from Africa or Asia, it’s praised; when it questions Western allies, it’s called “political.”

The ICC’s job is simple but important: to hold individuals, not states, accountable for the worst crimes against humanity, such as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression. If powerful countries don’t accept its authority, the idea of international justice starts to fall apart.

The conflict in Gaza has brought back an old moral question: can the world’s most powerful countries ever be held to the same legal standards they impose on others? The ICC is still standing firm for now, saying it will carry out its duties “without fear or favor.” But it does so under a lot of stress.

The US says that its sanctions protect its own sovereignty. But to a lot of people in the world, it looks like they’re trying to silence a court that is only trying to hold people accountable when politics prefers silence

As Judge Akane said not too long ago, “Justice delayed is justice denied, but justice obstructed is justice destroyed.”

The ICC can only bring charges against people, not countries. If countries start punishing people who want justice, though, the spirit of international law is in danger. The world must choose between believing in accountability and letting power have the last word again.

The peace initiative by US President Donald Trump

While the Genocide Convention , 1948 says the state has a legal obligation to take reasonable action to contribute toward preventing genocide, the noteworthy development in the Palestine issue is the recent peace initiative by the U.S president Donald Trump ,which was hailed by two former Presidents, Joe Biden and Bill Clinton ,paying way for ceasefire and release of hostages of both sides ,allowing relief material to victims . The only question remains is about pending cases at International Court of Justice[ICJ] and International Criminal Court[ICC] wherein Isreal forces is facing charges of war crimes and Genocide .

The ICEJ already hinted on constituting UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel .The moot point is whether U.S agrees for the independent inquiry for all commissioned acts committed by the Israeli forces

Conclusion: After the decades of struggle against illegal Isreal occupation, Palestinian looks to lead a peaceful life.. The International Criminal Court, which was established primarily to punish the perpetuators of war crimes ,crimes against Humanity and ,Genocide has to continue the proceeding despite US pressure for punishing the Isreal forces ,accused of all commissioned acts ,constituting the crime of Genocide, then only justice will be rendered to Gaza victims.

(The writer is Advocate in Telangana High Court, Visiting Faculty, P.G. College of Law, O.U.& Executive Editor Amaravathi Law Journal, Doctoral Scholar, DSNLU Visakhapatnam)