Threats to the International Criminal Court
- Author(s):
- Parliamentary Assembly
- Origin
- Assembly
debate on 30 September 2026 (33rd sitting) (see Doc. 16475, report
of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, rapporteur:
Mr Tekke Panman). Text adopted by the Assembly on
30 September 2026 (33rd sitting).See also Recommendation 2314 (2026). Provisional
version subject to editorial review.
1. The Parliamentary
Assembly has a long-standing commitment to international law, international
justice and the importance of accountability for the most heinous
atrocity crimes – genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity
and the crime of aggression.
2. The Assembly fully supports the work of the International
Criminal Court (“the ICC”) as the first permanent criminal court
seeking accountability for such crimes – following in the steps
of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal and successive
ad hoc tribunals. The Assembly recognises the crucial role that the
ICC plays as a court of last resort for international crimes committed
on the territory of a State Party to the Rome Statute of the ICC
(“Rome Statute”), by nationals of a State Party, where jurisdiction
is accepted by another State or established following a referral
by the United Nations Security Council.
3. The Assembly is deeply concerned that the system of international
justice, developed in the aftermath of the Second World War – to
restrain brutality, to punish war crimes and to give victims a voice
– is under threat. This is particularly acute in attempts to threaten
and intimidate international judges and prosecutors of the ICC,
by subjecting them to coercive measures for undertaking their functions
as part of the international criminal justice system.
4. These actions have been taken by States that are not parties
to the Rome Statute and, in particular, the United States of America
and the Russian Federation. These coercive measures have been imposed
on international judges and prosecutors because they were carrying
out the international mandate granted to them to investigate alleged
war crimes and crimes against humanity falling within the ICC’s
jurisdiction, specifically in Ukraine, Afghanistan and Palestine.
5. These measures have far-reaching consequences for the ICC’s
operational functioning, as well as for the professional and private
lives of the officials concerned. Eight judges and the former Prosecutor
have been sentenced in absentia for
up to fifteen years imprisonment by the Russian Federation for their
roles in investigating war crimes committed in Ukraine and issuing
arrest warrants in those proceedings, including against Vladimir
Putin. Half the ICC’s judges, including its President, and the entire
leadership of the Prosecutor's Office have been individually sanctioned
by the United States of America for investigating international
crimes allegedly committed in Afghanistan and Palestine. If non-States
Parties wish to avoid the exercise of jurisdiction of the ICC over
their nationals, there are legal ways of doing this, such as ensuring
that adequate measures are in place to prevent their nationals from
engaging in war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide on the
territory of one of the States Parties to the ICC and, if necessary,
hold them accountable.
6. The Assembly emphasises that international judges and prosecutors
should not be subject to sanctions or criminal measures merely for
carrying out the functions entrusted to them under international
treaties. Such action constitutes an unacceptable attack on their
independence and poses a serious threat to the authority and effectiveness
of the international criminal justice system. If handing down a
judgment or taking another decision within the mandate of an international
court in Europe is deemed to be conduct liable to sanctions, this
threatens not only the ICC and its independence, but also the rule
of law throughout Europe and, therefore, European fundamental values
and democratic security.
7. The Assembly recalls that States Parties to the Rome Statute
are under an obligation to co-operate fully with the ICC and to
execute its arrest warrants, and that, in accordance with Article
27 of the Rome Statute, official capacity, including that of Head
of State, does not exempt a person from criminal responsibility
nor bar the ICC from exercising its jurisdiction. It deplores the
failure of certain States Parties to arrest persons subject to the
ICC warrants present on their territory, as found by ICC Pre-Trial
Chamber II in respect of Mongolia on 24 October 2024, and calls
on all States Parties to refrain from inviting, hosting or facilitating
the travel of persons subject to ICC arrest warrants and to arrest
and surrender them to the ICC should those persons enter their territory.
8. Attacks on international organisations central to the international
rules-based order are a direct attack on the international order
itself. Whilst a State can always work to improve the functioning
or effectiveness of an international organisation, or challenge
its decisions through the appropriate diplomatic and legal channels, this
is no reason to fundamentally undermine international justice institutions
or unduly interfere with their independence.
9. The Assembly is similarly concerned by media reports that
foreign States are threatening to impose sanctions to try to intimidate
national judges within Europe. Any such interference constitutes
an affront to the rule of law and the essence of the core constitutional
principle protecting the independence of the judiciary. The Assembly
calls on all European States to undertake a reflection on how to
better protect national and international judges from such threats
of interference.
10. The Assembly emphasises the importance of establishing a climate
in which international and national judicial institutions and international
organisations, based in Europe, can be resilient in carrying out
the mandates conferred on them by States without being indirectly
paralysed by external political pressure. If European States allow
foreign States to interfere in this way with judges exercising a
judicial mandate and based within their territory, the very sovereignty
of European States is threatened.
11. The Assembly calls on the international community, and in
particular the States Parties to the Rome Statute, to take action
to protect the ICC and other international institutions from such
external threats. This should be achieved by ensuring that the officials’
privileges and immunities are scrupulously respected, and by establishing
stronger mechanisms to protect international organisations from
future risks. Specifically, States Parties must ensure that third-country
sanctions have no impact on the functioning of international organisations
and their officials within their jurisdictions.
12. The Assembly calls on Council of Europe member States and,
where applicable, on all States Parties to the Rome Statute, as
well as the European Union, to:
12.1 ratify
or accede to the Rome Statute and the Agreement on the Privileges
and Immunities of the ICC, if they have not yet done so;
12.2 maintain and reaffirm their commitment to, or as applicable,
their support for, the ICC and its integrity and independence, both
in bilateral relations with third countries and in all multilateral
fora, including the United Nations and other international organisations;
12.3 continue to make clear their support and solidarity for
the work of the ICC, including through statements to correct misleading
narratives about the work of the ICC;
12.4 provide effective support and protection to judges, prosecutors
and staff members of the ICC and other international tribunals who
face, or are at a foreseeable risk of facing, sanctions or other
forms of external pressure as a result of the performance of their
official functions. Where appropriate, these measures should also
extend to former ICC officials and to the families of those affected;
12.5 take concerted action to ensure that the ICC and other
international organisations and their officials based in Europe
have unimpeded access to all the services – including banking, insurance, medical
and IT services – they need to fulfil their international mandate,
thus ensuring technological and financial autonomy for these multilateral
organisations, including by:
12.5.1 providing
advice and publishing guidance to service providers that access
European markets, to ensure that:
12.5.1.1 there
is no over compliance with third-country sanctions when service providers
operate within European markets;
12.5.1.2 service providers do not arbitrarily deny – or render
more difficult – the provision of services to officials working
for the ICC or an international organisation based in Europe;
12.5.1.3 service providers are given the necessary legal and practical
support to continue to provide services to judges, prosecutors and
other officials of the ICC, as well as to officials of other international
organisations based in Europe;
12.5.2 undertaking a thorough, strategic review to ensure that
European institutions, international organisations based in Europe,
as well as companies and governmental organisations based in Europe
have access to a wider range of service providers to enable them to
be independent and autonomous from external interference;
12.5.3 in the European Union, reviewing the European Union Blocking
Statute to make it fit for purpose and more effective in achieving
its objectives;
12.5.4 in non-European Union member States, adopting, reviewing
and updating, as necessary, national legal protections, equivalent
to the European Union Blocking Statute, to guarantee access to services
to individuals who are unjustly subject to third-country sanctions and
other coercive measures;
12.5.5 in both European Union and non-European Union member States,
activating the European Union Blocking Statute and equivalent national
legal measures to guarantee access to service provision, including
banking and IT, so as to shield the ICC, and its judges, prosecutors and
staff, from external coercive measures;
12.6 encourage innovative initiatives to enhance the strategic
autonomy of institutions based in Europe, such as the development
of alternative technology and banking solutions that are less vulnerable
to the actions of non-member States of the Council of Europe;
12.7 ensure that the ICC continues to be provided with adequate
financial and human resources, enabling it to fulfil its mandate
in an independent and efficient manner, in the light of the new
threats it faces;
12.8 ensure that the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC has
the resources necessary to pursue its investigation into the situation
in Ukraine, co-operate fully with the ICC, the Special Tribunal
for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine and the International
Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine
at Eurojust, including through the sharing of evidence, and take
the necessary measures at national level to give effect to the ICC’s
arrest warrants in relation to the situation in Ukraine, including
by ensuring that persons subject to such warrants cannot benefit
from immunities or diplomatic invitations;
12.9 take all appropriate measures to facilitate, to the extent
permitted under the applicable legal frameworks, effective co-operation
and, where appropriate, co-ordination between the ICC and the Special
Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, including
through the lawful exchange of information and evidence, with a
view to enabling their distinct mandates to operate in a complementary and
mutually reinforcing manner, avoiding unnecessary duplication of
efforts and ensuring coherent and comprehensive individual accountability
for international crimes falling within their respective mandates, while
fully respecting the independence, confidentiality requirements
and procedural safeguards of each institution.
13. The Assembly calls on all other States that are not Parties
to the Rome Statute, including Council of Europe observer States
and States whose parliaments enjoys observer or partner for democracy
status with the Assembly, to:
13.1 refrain
from maintaining or adopting any legal measures giving rise to sanctions
or other coercive measures against judges and prosecutors of the
ICC, or against other individuals on the basis of their co-operation
with the ICC;
13.2 cease any action to intimidate or pressure other States
to withdraw or to cease co-operation with the ICC;
13.3 respect the ICC, its mandate, integrity and independence,
while maintaining dialogue with States Parties to the Rome Statute
to discuss any legal or diplomatic disputes that could arise in
connection with the exercise of its jurisdiction, in full respect
of international law and the Rome Statute; and
13.4 respect the privileges and immunities granted to UN officials
and experts under the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities
of the United Nations.
14. Given that threats to individuals and entities potentially
extend to all international organisations supporting the international
justice system, the Assembly invites the Secretary General of the
Council of Europe to:
14.1 assess
the Council of Europe’s level of vulnerability to external risks
and threats;
14.2 take appropriate actions to ensure that the Council of
Europe, its staff and experts, are adequately protected from any
such threats;
14.3 draw lessons from the ICC and avoid over-reliance on companies
that are at risk of having their provision of services within Europe
interfered with by non-member States, especially in the banking
and technology sectors, in order to reduce vulnerability to such
risks.
