US Imposes Sanctions On ICC After Former Judge Wins Nobel Peace Prize

The United States has imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC), escalating tensions with European allies hours after former court judge Navi Pillay won the Nobel Peace Prize.

The US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the sanctions on Friday, saying the measures were aimed at preventing the court from prosecuting American citizens.

“President Trump will never allow the International Criminal Court to prosecute Americans,” Rubio said in a statement.

“That is why, today, the United States is sanctioning the International Criminal Court. We will ban transactions with this rogue court, cutting off their resources and crippling its ability to operate,” he added.

ICC Deputy Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan condemned the sanctions, saying they would not stop the court from carrying out its responsibilities.

“The sanctions are intended to undermine the rule of law internationally and the work that an independent judicial institution is doing,” Khan told Reuters.

“Our work will continue across all our situations, our investigations and our prosecutions,” she added.

The Trump administration has repeatedly criticised the ICC over its investigations and arrest warrants, including those issued against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials. Washington has also opposed the court’s previous investigation into alleged crimes committed by US personnel in Afghanistan, which has since been closed.

Established in 2002, the ICC prosecutes individuals accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It has 125 member states, including all European Union countries and most members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). The United States and Turkey are not members.

The sanctions could affect companies providing services to the court, including banking, insurance and software firms, as US restrictions generally prohibit American businesses from conducting transactions with sanctioned entities.

The Trump administration previously imposed sanctions on ICC officials during his first term, but the measures were reversed under former President Joe Biden. Washington introduced fresh sanctions against court officials shortly after Trump returned to office in January 2025.

In anticipation of further restrictions, ICC officials have reportedly moved some office computers from Microsoft software to open-source alternatives and made alternative arrangements for banking and health insurance.

The court’s registrar, Osvaldo Zavala Giler, called on the European Union earlier this week to prepare a blocking mechanism to shield European countries and companies from the effects of US sanctions imposed beyond American jurisdiction.

Following Friday’s announcement, the US Treasury issued four general licences permitting certain transactions involving the ICC’s telecommunications, software, pension payments and detainees.

Rubio said Washington had delayed the sanctions to give the court and countries that are parties to its founding Rome Statute an opportunity to address US concerns.

“Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC. We expect our allies, many of whom are part of the ICC and that rely on American servicemembers for their defense, to rein in the court,” he said.

Rubio added that the measures were structured to allow member states to negotiate a resolution.

“If these efforts do not bear fruit, we will continue to adjust accordingly,” he said.

The sanctions were announced hours after Pillay, a South African jurist who served on the ICC’s Appeals Chamber from 2003 to 2008, won the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Nobel committee said the award was intended to highlight the importance of international justice at a time when judges and institutions of international law faced political pressure.

“An international legal system in which war criminals are held to account and the victims of abuse see justice served is a precondition for a peaceful world,” the committee said.

The development has further highlighted divisions over the role of international judicial institutions and their independence from political pressure.