Logo Assembly Logo Hemicycle

Threats to the International Criminal Court

Doc. 16475: compendium of written amendments | Doc. 16475 | 30/09/2026 | Final version

Contents

A Draft Resolution
B Draft Recommendation

Compendium index

Amendment 3 Amendment 2 Amendment 4 Amendment 5 Amendment 1

Caption: AdoptedRejectedWithdrawnNo electronic votes

ADraft Resolution

1The 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.
2The 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.
3The 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.
4These 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.
5These 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.

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Mr Dominik OBERHOFER, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 5, insert the following paragraph:

"The Assembly strongly condemns the measures taken by the Russian Federation in retaliation for the arrest warrants issued by the ICC against Vladimir Putin, Maria Lvova-Belova, Sergei Kobylash, Viktor Sokolov, Sergei Shoigu and Valery Gerasimov, notably for the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children, and the criminal prosecution, conviction in absentia and sentencing of the former Prosecutor and eight judges of the ICC, the placing of ICC officials on a ‘wanted list’, the threats of missile strikes against the seat of the Court in The Hague made by the Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, and cyberattacks and espionage attempts against the ICC. These acts constitute a deliberate attempt to obstruct the course of international justice and are themselves capable of amounting to offences against the administration of justice under Article 70 of the Rome Statute."

6The 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.

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Mr Dominik OBERHOFER, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 6, insert the following paragraph:

"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."

7Attacks 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.
8The 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.
9The 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.
10The 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.
11The 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:
11.1ratify or accede to the Rome Statute and the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the ICC, if they have not yet done so;
11.2maintain 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;
11.3continue 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;
11.4provide effective support and protection to judges, prosecutors and staff members of the ICC 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;

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

In the draft resolution, paragraph 11.4, first sentence, after the words "staff members of the ICC", insert the following words:

"and other international tribunals"

11.5take 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:
11.5.1providing advice and publishing guidance to service providers that access European markets, to ensure that:
11.5.1.1there is no over compliance with third-country sanctions when service providers operate within European markets;
11.5.1.2service 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;
11.5.1.3service 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;
11.5.2undertaking 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;
11.5.3in the European Union, reviewing the European Union Blocking Statute to make it fit for purpose and more effective in achieving its objectives;
11.5.4in 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;
11.5.5in 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;
11.6encourage 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;
11.7ensure 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.

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Mr Dominik OBERHOFER, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 11.7, insert the following paragraph:

"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."

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Ms Alicia KEARNS, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 11.7, insert the following paragraph:

"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."

Explanatory note

Self-explanatory

12The 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:
12.1refrain 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;
12.2cease any action to intimidate or pressure other States to withdraw or to cease co-operation with the ICC;
12.3respect 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
12.4respect the privileges and immunities granted to UN officials and experts under the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.
13Given 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:
13.1assess the Council of Europe’s level of vulnerability to external risks and threats;
13.2take appropriate actions to ensure that the Council of Europe, its staff and experts, are adequately protected from any such threats;
13.3draw 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.

BDraft Recommendation

1The Parliamentary Assembly refers to its Resolution ... (2026) “Threats to the International Criminal Court” and underlines that attempts to undermine the International Criminal Court by attacking judicial independence and intimidating international officials are an affront to international law, international justice, the principle of accountability and to promises made following the atrocities of the Second World War.
2The Assembly considers that it is essential for the international community not only to condemn such attacks on international organisations central to the rules-based international order, but also to act in solidarity and defend international justice institutions from such threats. In this context, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers promote and facilitate international action in this area. In particular, the Assembly calls on the Committee of Ministers to:
2.1support organisations facing such threats through public statements condemning attacks, threats and coercive measures against the staff of international organisations and supporting their mandates and work;
2.2support the drafting, adoption and effective implementation of measures to counter unlawful sanctions and reprisals, drawing on the actions taken at the European Union level, to protect international organisations and their staff and family members from the extraterritorial effects of legislation adopted by third countries, including though developing a toolkit, and considering the possible development of a legal instrument to assist member States in protecting individuals and organisations from the extraterritorial effects of third-country measures;
2.3initiate a reflection within the Council of Europe, involving other international organisations as necessary, to develop tools and the sharing of best practice to support international organisations working to uphold international justice, including:
2.3.1measures to protect such organisations and their staff against threats, particularly from non-member States;
2.3.2the examination and sharing of best practice amongst international organisations – including in relation to privileges and immunities protections – and the extent to which good practices from one international organisation can be used or transposed to another in order to best protect their staff and independent functioning against hostile actors;
2.3.3creative solutions in mitigating the risks of hostile actions;
2.4organise a meeting of host States of international organisations based in Europe, to exchange best practice on how best to ensure that those international organisations are given appropriate support to be resilient to future threats and attacks by third States.