In a move that has sparked global debate, former U.S. President Donald Trump issued an executive order imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC). The order, announced in Washington, targets ICC staff and affiliates, citing the court's alleged "abuse of power" and "illegitimate" actions against both the United States and its ally, Israel. This development follows the ICC's indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes in Gaza.
The ICC, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, was established by the Rome Statute in 2002. Neither the United States nor Israel are signatories to this treaty, which has been a pivotal point in their opposition to the court's jurisdiction. Trump's executive order specifically aims at ICC personnel involved in investigations against the U.S. and Israel, potentially barring them from travel, accessing funds, or entering the U.S. Family members and those assisting with investigations may also face sanctions.
The repercussions of these sanctions are far-reaching. Entities outside the U.S. risk losing access to the American financial system if they contravene these measures. Moreover, it could deter individuals from cooperating with the ICC due to fear of penalties or travel restrictions.
"Thank you, President Trump, for your bold ICC executive order. It will defend America and Israel from the anti-American and antisemitic corrupt court." – Benjamin Netanyahu (@IsraeliPM)
Trump's decision comes in response to what he described as "baseless" arrest warrants issued by the ICC for Netanyahu and Gallant. The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation supporting these sanctions with a 243-140 vote, although the Senate blocked it on January 28. The Netherlands, home to the ICC, expressed regret over the executive order, emphasizing that the court's work is crucial in combating impunity.
"undermine the international criminal justice system as a whole" – António Costa (@eucopresident)
Critics argue that these sanctions pose a significant threat to international justice systems. António Costa, President of the European Council, warned that such actions could "undermine the international criminal justice system as a whole." There is a growing concern that the executive order could intimidate those working with or for the ICC.
"This is an attempt to intimidate the ICC as an organisation and those who work for it." – Yossi Mekelberg
Yossi Mekelberg, an Israel analyst at Chatham House, highlighted that this move could deter cooperation with the ICC. Others fear that human rights activists and victims may find themselves unable to enter the U.S. or face penalties.
"We are talking about human rights activists, victims, etc. Those kind of people may be shut out of the US or face penalties." – Benjamin Netanyahu (@IsraeliPM)
The executive order has been described as an assault on international legal frameworks established post-World War II. Saul Takahashi noted that by targeting the ICC, the U.S. undermines international humanitarian law and several conventions related to laws of war and human rights.
"By targeting the only international legal institution that has enforcement capacity relating to the post-World War II international legal regime, the executive order in effect undermines international humanitarian law, including 1949 four Geneva Conventions, the 1951 Genocide Convention and a series of international conventions relating to laws of war and human rights." – Saul Takahashi
Proponents of the executive order argue that it protects national sovereignty against what they perceive as overreach by an international body lacking accountability. The White House stated that actions taken by the ICC against Israel and the United States set a dangerous precedent.
"The actions taken by the International Criminal Court against Israel and the United States set a dangerous precedent." – The White House
The debate extends beyond legalities to broader geopolitical implications. Neve Gordon remarked on the stakes involved, suggesting that while aimed at curbing ICC's judicial work, these sanctions represent a direct attack on established international legal orders.
"The stakes could not be higher. Even though the sanctions are aimed at the ICC and its independent and impartial judicial work, they actually constitute a direct attack on the post-World War II international legal order." – Neve Gordon
Despite these challenges, some believe that those committed to justice will continue their work undeterred by political pressures.
"Given their history of resistance and their willingness to stand up and speak truth to power in order to uphold the law despite years of pressure, I doubt that this executive order will make them bow down." – Neve Gordon
