The International Criminal Court (ICC) has sharply criticized the United States’ latest move to impose sanctions on two of its sitting judges, warning that the action threatens judicial independence and the global rule of law.
In a statement, the ICC said it “deplores” the US administration’s decision to sanction Judge Gocha Lordkipanidze of Georgia and Judge Erdenebalsuren Damdin of Mongolia. The new designations come on top of earlier sanctions imposed on nine elected officials from the Court’s judiciary and the Office of the Prosecutor, representing different regional groups.
What are the sanctions about?
While the US is not a member of the ICC, it has previously used sanctions to pressure the Court over investigations that could implicate nationals of non-member states. The ICC did not specify the legal basis cited by Washington for the latest measures, but stressed that the judges and prosecutors being targeted were lawfully elected by the Court’s States Parties.
According to the ICC, these sanctions go beyond political disagreement and amount to direct pressure on judicial officers for carrying out their legal mandate.
Why is the ICC concerned?
The Court described the sanctions as a “flagrant attack” on its independence as an impartial judicial institution. It warned that targeting judges and prosecutors undermines the rule of law and sets a dangerous precedent.
“When judicial actors are threatened for applying the law, it is the international legal order itself that is placed at risk,” the ICC said.
The Court emphasized that its authority comes from the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC and was ratified by its member states across different regions.
What does this mean for the ICC’s work?
Despite the sanctions, the ICC said it will continue to perform its mandate independently and impartially. It reaffirmed its commitment to stand by its staff and, more importantly, by victims of what it called “unimaginable atrocities.”
The Court stressed that its work is guided by international law and the interests of victims of international crimes, not by political pressure from any single government.
Who is backing the ICC?
The ICC also acknowledged the “consistent demonstrations of solidarity” it has received from its States Parties, civil society organizations, and supporters of international justice.
It said it will continue working with its partners to ensure the effective and independent implementation of its mandate, despite mounting political challenges.
Why this matters
The clash highlights ongoing tensions between international justice institutions and powerful states that reject their jurisdiction.
For the ICC, the issue goes beyond sanctions. It is about whether judges can carry out their duties without fear of retaliation — a principle the Court says is essential to upholding justice for victims worldwide.
About The Author
