E fundit!

09:13 CRIME

Millions of pensions and social benefits were stolen/ 3 Albanian Post officials in handcuffs

A scandalous and criminal case has been registered in Durr...

Why the US will “dismantle” the International Criminal Court

2026-07-16 08:32:00, Kosova & Bota CNA

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has significantly escalated his rhetoric against the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. This could have serious consequences for the court itself.

The Hague is home to two major international courts that are often confused with each other. On one side is the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ), which deals with disputes between states and is housed in the historic Peace Palace. On the other side is the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has existed since 2002 and deals with the prosecution of individuals responsible for war crimes. It is housed in a modern building made of glass and concrete.

Unlike the UN, which has 193 member states, the ICC has only 125 members. Non-member states include the US, Russia and China, as well as several countries in Asia and North Africa.

When Marco Rubio recently threatened to destroy the court “brick by brick,” it was clear he was referring to the ICC. His department listed the measures the U.S. is considering against the court. These include: banning ICC staff from entering the U.S.; expanding sanctions against the court and organizations affiliated with it; and more stringently reviewing relations with countries that do not reject the ICC’s authority while receiving U.S. aid. The U.S. has pressured the court before, but the new tone has caught the attention of international law experts around the world.

Andreas Schüller, co-director of the program on international crimes and legal accountability at the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) in Berlin, says: "The US and Marco Rubio are making public something that has been happening for more than a year: exerting diplomatic pressure on other states to change their positions and in some cases their voting behavior in relation to the ICC."

According to him, the fact that there is now open talk of a "campaign" indicates that it is a broader strategy, which aims to include other states that are not members of the ICC.

A court from which no one should escape justice

The US is not a member of the International Criminal Court. This means that crimes committed on US territory cannot be tried in The Hague. However, the ICC has jurisdiction even when serious crimes are suspected of having been committed on the territory of a member state. On this basis, arrest warrants have been issued against, among others, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The existence of the ICC is linked to the lessons learned from history. The Nuremberg trials after World War II are considered the genesis of international criminal law. Later, the war crimes tribunals in the former Yugoslavia and the Rwandan genocide tribunals in the 1990s strengthened the demand for a permanent international institution.

International law lawyer Kai Ambos from the University of Göttingen emphasizes: "It is about the fundamental issue of responsibility, whether in Ukraine, Iran or Gaza. It cannot be that such serious crimes are committed and the main perpetrators, especially political leaders, go unpunished."

Should American citizens end up in the dock?

In a video statement, Marco Rubio claimed that the ICC threatens the American legal system: "The border control officers who remove violent criminals from our country. The American soldiers who risk their lives to protect our country. If we remain passive, all of them would be at the mercy of foreign judges thousands of miles away."

There are currently no criminal proceedings before the ICC against US citizens. The actions of immigration and border agents take place primarily within the US, where the court has no jurisdiction.

However, the situation is different for targeted killings of suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean. Former ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo described them in November as possible crimes against humanity.

How can the court protect itself from this pressure?

Kai Ambos fears that the so-called "chilling effect" could increase, meaning that ICC prosecutors could be more cautious or lenient towards American suspects.

He also mentions the phenomenon of "over-compliance" with sanctions: "Companies outside the US may decide to no longer cooperate with the court because they fear it could harm their business in America."

Since last year, the US State Department has imposed a series of sanctions on the ICC and several of its judges. In response, the court has tried to become less dependent on the US and, for example, replaced some Microsoft applications with a German open-source product.

Support from Europe

Andreas Schüller thinks that member states can help the court through many small actions: "When middle powers and smaller states come together to support international institutions and resist American pressure, that is the most important thing."

Following Rubio's threats, the European Union immediately lined up in support of the ICC. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul also came to its defense, stating that the court makes the world "safer and more just."

Interestingly, in 2022, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the US Senate also took a similar stance. In a resolution, the ICC was praised as "an international tribunal that aims to protect the rule of law", while investigations against Russia were welcomed. One of the co-sponsors of that resolution was Marco Rubio, now US Secretary of State./ DW