Ukraine Braces for Impact of ICC Sanctions

Yuliia Akymova

Journalist

Tuesday, 18 March, 2025

The link has been copied

Experts warn that the fresh sanctions the US has imposed on International Criminal Court (ICC) officials may pose a serious challenge to investigations into Russian war crimes in Ukraine.

The ICC has thus far issued arrest warrants for six senior Russian figures, including President Vladimir Putin and Children’s Ombudsman Maria Lvova-Belova on charges of ordering the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia. Other investigations relate to missile strokes on civilian energy infrastructure.

However, less than a month after his inauguration, President Donald Trump signed a decree imposing penalties against the ICC for its “persecution of the United States and its allies”. The document introduces financial and visa sanctions on individuals involved in investigations concerning Americans or their allies, as well as their family members.

The sanctions were triggered by the ICC's actions last year regarding arrest warrants issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, who are suspected of crimes against humanity and war crimes.

The expected consequences of the US move include financial constraints on the ICC, such as the freezing of assets belonging to court officials, a prohibition on entry to the US and appeals to other nations to cease cooperation with the court.

ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan, appointed in 2021, was the first ICC figure to be hit with economic and travel sanctions last month.

Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association, said that the impact on the ICC’s authority could be significant.

“The bitter irony is that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the UN Charter’s signing [which] established the legal framework for a new world order, safeguarding the principles of international law to govern relations between nations,” Ellis said. “The UN’s primary goal, as stated in its preamble, was ‘to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights’.”

In this context, he continued, the ICC stood as the “cornerstone of the international justice system”. He added that attacks on the court “undermine decades of progress for victims and weaken the rule of law worldwide”.

The US move could cripple the court's operations, as it threatens secondary sanctions against all international companies that cooperate with the court. This extends beyond human rights advocates working with witnesses to include technology corporations that, for example, provide crucial software for the ICC's operations.

All this could impact on its capacity to function effectively.

Impact of Sanctions

Although the US is not among the 125 state parties to the Rome Statute, the ICC’s founding charter, its stance toward the court has varied. Some US administrations have cooperated with the ICC, acknowledging its authority to prosecute war crimes in countries including Sudan and Uganda.

Since 2023, the US had been working with the ICC to share crucial information for investigations into war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Russia in Ukraine.

Former US President Joe Biden supported the ICC arrest warrants issued against Putin and other senior leaders, and Washington has also collaborated with the court’s Trust Fund for Victims to develop and fund rehabilitation programmes.

However, the crisis in US-Ukraine relations now raises concerns about its impact on justice efforts.

Yuriy Belousov, head of the war crimes department at Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office, told IWPR that the ICC’s investigations went beyond the deportation of Ukrainian children and attacks on energy infrastructure. The court is also examining cases of torture, sexual violence and cruel treatment in detention centres.

“The sheer scale and systematic nature of these actions raise the potential for them to be classified as crimes against humanity,” says Belousov.

His cautious assessment was that the US sanctions against the ICC would not impede investigations into Ukrainian cases. However, independent international law experts are more sceptical.

The Rome Statute contains a provision, Article 16, that allows the UN Security Council to defer an ICC investigation or prosecution for a renewable period of 12 months. There are fears in some quarters that this could be invoked to push through a ceasefire or peace deal.

“To put it simply, the UN Security Council could, with nine out of 15 votes, pass a resolution to suspend the ICC's investigation into Putin,” said Kateryna Rashevska, a lawyer at the Regional Centre for Human Rights.

With investigations suspended, arrest warrants may go unexecuted. This would effectively neutralise the mechanism that has significantly limited Putin’s international travel; and the UN resolution could be renewed indefinitely, also halting progress towards establishing a Special Tribunal for Russian aggression.

In 2020, during his previous term in office, Trump also imposed sanctions on the ICC. This action stemmed from the court’s investigations into actions by American military personnel in Afghanistan. At the time, Trump accused the ICC of conducting “illegitimate and baseless actions” against the US.

The sanctions significantly hampered the court’s authority and operational capacity. ICC staff faced asset freezes and were barred from entering the US, even though they might have needed to gather information there as part of their investigations.

Among other measures, Fatou Bensouda, then the ICC Chief Prosecutor, had her US visa revoked.

“Even with sanctions imposed against her, Bensouda requested the ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber to authorise a full investigation into Afghanistan,” Rashevska said. “The chamber, fearing repercussions from the sanctions, initially refused. However, Bensouda appealed and ultimately succeeded in launching the Afghanistan inquiry.”

Subsequently, some nations became hesitant to cooperate with the ICC on various cases, fearing repercussions from the US.

Although Trump’s decision was met with opposition by a majority of ICC member states - nearly 80 issued a joint letter warning that the move would “increase the risk of impunity for the most serious crimes and threaten to erode the international rule of law” – the future impact could be severe.

“International law is dependent on political will,” Ellis said. “The ICC lacks its own army or police force. The court’s success hinges on the international community’s willingness to back its rulings and demands. Now more than ever, this support is crucial.”