EU stands firm behind ICC amid US sanctions on judges

The European Union (EU) on Friday, June 6, 2025, expressed strong disapproval of the recent sanctions imposed by the United States on four judges from the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, voiced the EU’s concern, emphasizing that the ICC had the “full support” of the EU.

In her statement on Friday, von der Leyen reaffirmed the importance of the ICC in holding perpetrators of severe global crimes accountable and providing victims with a voice.

She added that the court must be allowed to operate without external pressure.

The EU’s stance highlights its commitment to the ICC’s independence and its belief in the necessity of a free judicial process in international law.

The US sanctions, announced on Thursday by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, target four judges at the Hague-based ICC.

It accused them of taking “illegitimate and baseless actions” against the US and its allies.

These sanctions were imposed after the ICC made significant rulings, including an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

It also includes a 2020 decision to investigate alleged war crimes committed by US forces in Afghanistan.

The four judges affected by the sanctions are:

• Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda,
• Luz del Carmen Ibanez Carranza of Peru,
• Reine Alapini-Gansou of Benin, and,
• Beti Hohler of Slovenia.

Von der Leyen’s comments were echoed by United Nations Human Rights Chief Volker Turk, who expressed being “profoundly disturbed” by the US decision.

He stressed that attacks on judges for performing their judicial duties, whether at the national or international level, undermine the rule of law and the principle of equal protection under the law.

Turk emphasized that such actions are harmful to good governance and the proper administration of justice, calling for the sanctions to be rescinded.

Antonio Costa, the President of the European Council, also spoke out in defense of the ICC, calling it “a cornerstone of international justice.”

He further highlighted the importance of maintaining the court’s independence and integrity.

Costa’s comments underscored the EU’s firm stance in supporting the ICC’s role in global justice and its defense against external interference.

The US sanctions were specifically linked to the ICC’s decisions regarding Israel and the US military.

The sanctions followed the court’s move to issue an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and its investigation into potential war crimes committed by US soldiers during their operations in Afghanistan.

The US State Department outlined that these actions by the ICC led to the sanctions against the four judges.

In response, Slovenia, one of the EU member states whose judge was sanctioned, strongly rejected the pressure on judicial bodies.

The Slovenian government announced that, in light of its citizen’s inclusion on the sanctions list, it would push for the activation of the EU’s “blocking statute.”

This statute is a mechanism that allows the EU to prohibit European companies from complying with US sanctions it deems unjust.

The blocking statute has been used in the past to safeguard European interests.

Notable is its use in preventing US sanctions from disrupting European trade with countries like Cuba and Iran.

The US sanctions, which place the four judges on a “Specially Designated Nationals” (SDN) list, mean that their assets within US jurisdiction will be frozen.

It also means they will be subject to heightened scrutiny, making it difficult for them to access financial services.

The SDN list is used by US banks and financial institutions globally to prevent sanctioned individuals from holding bank accounts or transferring funds.

The impact of these measures extends far beyond the US, affecting the global financial system, which often aligns with US regulations.

This is not the first time that the US has targeted officials from the ICC with sanctions.

Under the administration of Donald Trump, sanctions were imposed shortly after he took office in 2017.

They came with an executive order threatening sanctions against anyone involved in ICC investigations.

Critics at the time warned that such broad sanctions could deter potential witnesses and undermine the pursuit of justice.

On the other hand, Trump argued that the ICC’s investigations into US military actions were unjust and threatened the US and Israel’s legal rights.

Trump also contended that the investigations could lead to the harassment and potential arrest of military personnel.

The current sanctions mark a continuation of this policy, which has faced criticism from international bodies and foreign governments.

The sanctions have reportedly fuelled further tensions between the US and the ICC.

They have also fuelled tensions between the US and European nations, many of which remain staunch supporters of the court.

The EU’s response underlines the continuing divide over the role of the ICC in holding countries and their leaders accountable for crimes, as well as the broader implications for international justice.

As the situation unfolds, the US’s stance against the ICC and its efforts to impose sanctions may have broader consequences.

The consequences of the sanctions may not only be for the relationship between the US and Europe but also for the future of international legal institutions.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook