Trump’s Sanctions on ICC Judges Spark Global Outcry Over Justice

THE HAGUE, June 6, 2025 - The Trump administration has imposed sanctions on four International Criminal Court (ICC) judges, a bold retaliation against the court’s investigations into alleged war crimes by U.S. troops in Afghanistan and its issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. The sanctions, announced by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, target judges Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda, Luz del Carmen Ibanez Carranza of Peru, Reine Adelaide Sophie Alapini Gansou of Benin, and Beti Hohler of Slovenia.

Rubio accused the judges of engaging in “illegitimate and baseless actions” against the U.S. and its ally Israel, claiming the ICC oversteps its jurisdiction. The move has drawn sharp criticism from human rights advocates and ICC member states, who warn it undermines global justice.

A Deepening Feud With the ICC

The sanctions stem from the ICC’s November 2024 arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, accused of war crimes in Gaza, including restricting humanitarian aid and targeting civilians. Judges Alapini Gansou and Hohler authorized these warrants, while Bossa and Ibanez Carranza were involved in a 2020 decision greenlighting a probe into alleged U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan. Since 2021, the ICC has shifted focus to crimes by the Afghan government and Taliban, but the U.S., a non-member of the ICC, rejects its jurisdiction, as does Israel.

The sanctions freeze any U.S. assets of the judges and bar them from entering the country, severely limiting their ability to conduct routine financial transactions. The Treasury Department issued a temporary license allowing transactions to wind down until July 8, provided payments are made to blocked U.S. accounts.

ALSO READ | Trump-Musk Feud Ignites: Impeachment Threats and Contract Cuts Shake Tesla, SpaceX

Global Backlash and Operational Challenges

The ICC condemned the sanctions as an attack on its independence, emphasizing its role in delivering justice for victims of atrocities. Human rights advocates echoed this sentiment, with Liz Evenson of Human Rights Watch calling the measures a “flagrant attack on the rule of law.” The sanctions exacerbate existing challenges for the ICC, already strained by earlier U.S. sanctions on chief prosecutor Karim Khan, who stepped aside in May 2025 amid a UN investigation into alleged misconduct.

The court’s operations, including high-profile investigations into conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and Myanmar, face disruption as banks with U.S. ties may avoid transactions with sanctioned individuals. Over 70 ICC member states, including the UK, France, and Germany, issued a joint statement on February 7, 2025, affirming “unwavering support” for the court, while the Netherlands, the ICC’s host nation, pledged to mitigate the sanctions’ impact.

Did You Know?
The ICC, established in 2002 under the Rome Statute, has convicted only 11 individuals, including Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga in 2012 for conscripting child soldiers.

Broader Implications for International Justice

The sanctions reflect a broader U.S. stance against the ICC, rooted in concerns over sovereignty. A 2002 U.S. law authorizes military action to free Americans or allies detained by the court, underscoring long-standing distrust. During Trump’s first term, sanctions targeted then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda over the Afghanistan probe, later lifted by President Joe Biden in 2021. The current measures, authorized under a February 2025 executive order, also follow a January 2025 U.S. House vote to punish the ICC, though the Senate blocked the legislation.

Critics argue the sanctions could deter witnesses and hinder investigations globally, while supporters, including some U.S. lawmakers, view them as necessary to protect American and Israeli interests. The ICC’s lack of enforcement power, relying on member states to execute warrants, further complicates its mission.