Washington – In a statement released Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States is imposing sanctions on two officials of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The sanctions target ICC President Tomoko Akane, a Japanese national, and senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye of Senegal.
Sanctions and rationale
Rubio asserted that both individuals have “directly engaged in efforts by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute officials whose government has not consented to ICC jurisdiction.” He framed the action as a necessary step to protect American sovereignty and the sovereignty of other nations that are not parties to the court.
Background of the U.S. campaign
The move follows a broader “whole‑of‑government” campaign launched last month by the State Department to dismantle the ICC. The Trump administration previously imposed a series of sanctions on ICC officials for attempts to investigate U.S. and Israeli actions, despite neither country being members of the court. President Donald Trump’s criticism of the ICC dates back to his first term, when his administration challenged the court’s investigations into alleged war crimes by U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Recent ICC actions that prompted U.S. response
In November 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for several officials, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, alleging war crimes related to the Gaza conflict. The court claimed “reasonable grounds” to believe Netanyahu bore responsibility for acts such as starvation as a method of warfare and other crimes against humanity.
Rubio said the United States expects more countries to join the campaign by ending funding and participation in what he described as a “politicized and unaccountable court.” He warned that the ICC’s ability to target American nationals and those of other non‑member states must end, and that the administration stands ready to take additional measures if necessary.
International response
A U.S. official noted that nations that partner with U.S. law enforcement, host U.S. military forces, or benefit from the broader U.S. security umbrella are being asked to reject the ICC’s purported authority to prosecute American officials and servicemen.
In late July, Venezuela’s interim government announced it would withdraw from the ICC, citing a perceived geographic bias toward African and Latin American nations. The State Department praised the decision, stating the court had wasted resources investigating officials from countries with competent, independent judicial systems.
Chad also announced its withdrawal from the ICC around the same time. The ICC’s Assembly of States Parties expressed concern, warning that such withdrawals could undermine the collective pursuit of justice and weaken global efforts to end impunity.
Implications for U.S. foreign policy
The sanctions and the broader campaign signal a continued U.S. stance that the ICC should not have jurisdiction over American citizens or those of allied nations that have not consented to its authority. Critics argue the move could isolate the United States from multilateral justice mechanisms, while supporters contend it protects constitutional rights and national sovereignty.
As the United States seeks additional partners to join its effort, the future relationship between Washington and the ICC remains uncertain, with potential ramifications for international law, diplomatic relations, and the global fight against impunity.
Original reporting: KTVZ (Central Oregon) — read the source article.
