The Nature and Purpose of the International Criminal Court (ICC)

Orange is the new Black
Written By Pieter Lamper

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the world’s first permanent international court established to investigate, prosecute, and try individuals accused of the most serious crimes of global concern: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and, since 2018, the crime of aggression. The ICC aims to end impunity for atrocity crimes and to ensure that those most responsible—often leaders and key perpetrators—are brought to justice even when national systems are unwilling or unable to do so. Governed by the Rome Statute adopted in 1998 and coming into force on 1 July 2002, the Court is headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, and operates independently, distinct from the United Nations though with cooperative agreements. Its principal organs include the Presidency, the Chambers (judicial branches), the independent Office of the Prosecutor, and the Registry, which manages logistics, victim support, and witness protection. The ICC’s jurisdiction is triggered only for crimes committed after 1 July 2002 and is generally limited to cases involving territory or nationals of states party to the Rome Statute, or following a referral by the United Nations Security Council. Its role is complementary to national courts—only stepping in as a “court of last resort”.

Founding Principles and Legal Framework

The ICC was established to address the limitations of previous ad hoc tribunals and to create a permanent mechanism to advance international criminal law. The core principles underlying the ICC include the fight against impunity, complementarity with national jurisdictions, accountability for the most serious crimes, and the promotion of global justice. The ICC prosecutes individuals—rather than states—for their personal criminal responsibility in international crimes. The Court’s procedures are founded in both civil law and common law traditions, ensuring fair and transparent trials, a presumption of innocence, the right to defense, and the participation of victims. The ICC is also notable for its victims’ participation program, which allows victims to contribute directly to proceedings and seek reparations.

Scope of ICC Jurisdiction and Trigger Mechanisms

The ICC’s subject-matter jurisdiction is limited to four core crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Its temporal jurisdiction is restricted to crimes committed after 1 July 2002, the date when the Rome Statute entered into force. Territorial and personal jurisdiction apply to crimes committed on the territory or by nationals of ICC member states; non-member countries can accept jurisdiction for specific cases, and the UN Security Council may refer situations from any nation regardless of ICC membership.

Investigations can be triggered in three ways:

  • By referral of a situation by an ICC State Party,

  • By referral from the UN Security Council,

  • At the initiative of the ICC Prosecutor, subject to judicial review and approval.

Nations Subject to ICC Arrest Warrants

Since its founding, the ICC has issued arrest warrants connected to individuals from a range of nations facing allegations of grave international crimes. Notable examples include:

  • Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): Congolese rebel leaders, such as Thomas Lubanga (convicted for child soldier recruitment), were subject to ICC arrest warrants and convictions.

  • Uganda: Joseph Kony, leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army, and other Ugandan rebels have been indicted for crimes against humanity and war crimes.

  • Sudan: Former President Omar al-Bashir is subject to an ICC warrant for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity committed during the Darfur conflict.

  • Libya: Former leader Muammar Gaddafi and associates have been indicted for crimes during the 2011 civil conflict.

  • Kenya: President Uhuru Kenyatta (while serving as Deputy Prime Minister) was indicted regarding post-election violence but charges were later withdrawn.

  • Côte d’Ivoire: Former President Laurent Gbagbo was indicted, though later acquitted.

  • Central African Republic, Mali, and the Philippines: Various militia leaders and officials have faced arrest warrants for crimes arising from internal armed conflicts.

  • Russia: In 2023, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and other officials for the forced deportation of children during the invasion of Ukraine.

  • Israel and Palestine: In 2024, arrest warrants were issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas leader Mohammed Deif in connection with possible war crimes in the Israel-Hamas war.

  • Afghanistan: In 2025, arrest warrants were requested for senior Taliban leaders for crimes against women and girls since their 2021 takeover.

  • Other notable cases: Leaders from the Central African Republic, Côte d’Ivoire, and Libya have also been targeted in ICC proceedings.

Countries Subject to ICC Investigations

A number of countries have been formally subject to investigations by the ICC:

  • Afghanistan

  • Bangladesh/Myanmar

  • Burundi

  • Central African Republic (CAR)—two distinct investigations

  • Côte d’Ivoire

  • Darfur in Sudan

  • Democratic Republic of the Congo

  • Georgia

  • Kenya

  • Libya

  • Mali

  • Palestine

  • The Philippines

  • Uganda

  • Ukraine

  • Venezuela.

In addition, the ICC has conducted and closed preliminary examinations in countries such as Colombia, Gabon, Guinea, Honduras, Iraq/United Kingdom, South Korea, and Bolivia, among others.

ICC’s Enforcement and International Cooperation

The ICC lacks its own enforcement arm and relies on cooperation from national police and judicial systems to execute arrest warrants and facilitate transfers of suspects to The Hague. States party to the Rome Statute are legally obligated to enforce ICC warrants, and many cases proceed only when suspects are apprehended by or transferred from member states. The ICC’s effectiveness is sometimes hampered by the refusal of certain states—including influential countries like the United States, Russia, Israel, China, India, and others—to recognize its authority or to cooperate with its processes.

Table: Overview of Countries with ICC Investigations or Arrest Warrants

  • Uganda Yes Joseph Kony, others

  • Democratic Republic of Congo Yes Thomas Lubanga, others

  • Sudan (Darfur) Yes Omar al-Bashir, others

  • Libya Yes Muammar Gaddafi, others

  • Kenya Yes Uhuru Kenyatta (withdrawn)

  • Côte d’Ivoire Yes Laurent Gbagbo

  • Central African Republic Yes Various

  • Mali Yes Ahmad al-Faqi al-Mahdi

  • Georgia Yes Various

  • Palestine Yes Warrants for Hamas leaders

  • Israel Yes Benjamin Netanyahu, Yoav Gallant

  • Russia Yes Vladimir Putin, others

  • Afghanistan Yes Taliban leaders

  • Bangladesh/Myanmar Yes Various

  • Philippines Yes Various

  • Venezuela Yes Various

  • Ukraine Yes Various

Summary and Importance

The International Criminal Court stands as a milestone in the evolution of international criminal justice, enshrining a global commitment to pursue accountability for the gravest crimes and to ensure that perpetrators cannot escape punishment through impunity or lack of domestic action. Since its establishment, it has issued arrest warrants and initiated investigations involving individuals from a diverse array of nations, addressing atrocities on nearly every continent. While the Court faces significant challenges regarding cooperation, enforcement, and accusations of selectivity or political bias, its work continues to develop international criminal jurisprudence and offers a measure of justice to victims worldwide.

Pieter Lamper https://www.opened-source.com
Previous

Sanctions Imposed by the Trump Administration on the ICC
Next

The Impact of Trauma on Individuals and Collectives