The administration of US President Donald Trump is preparing new sanctions against the International Criminal Court (ICC), a move that could significantly disrupt the court’s finances and operations.
The proposed measures are part of Washington’s broader campaign against the ICC, which Trump’s administration has accused of threatening US sovereignty and the interests of its allies.
The court, based in The Hague, Netherlands, was established in 2002 and currently has 125 member states. It prosecutes individuals accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity when national courts are unable or unwilling to act.
The Trump administration has strongly opposed the ICC over its investigations involving Israel and the United States.
Washington has particularly objected to arrest warrants issued by the court for Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The ICC has also previously investigated alleged crimes involving US forces in Afghanistan.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has described the court as a threat to American sovereignty and US allies.
In July, Rubio announced a broader campaign aimed at isolating the ICC, saying Washington would use available tools to dismantle the institution.
The United States had initially imposed sanctions on individual ICC judges and prosecutors. The new measures are expected to target the court as an organisation.
According to sources cited by Reuters, the proposed sanctions could target the entire ICC and its roughly 900 employees from about 100 countries.
One major concern is the court’s access to the international financial system.
US Treasury sanctions could prevent American individuals and companies from providing funds, goods or services to the ICC without special permission from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control.
The restrictions could also affect services used by the court, including banking, data storage, email services and contracts with outside investigators.
ICC employees could also face restrictions involving US travel and financial services.
Beyond the direct effects, the sanctions could create a wider deterrent for non-US banks, companies and contractors that work with the court.
Financial institutions may avoid doing business with the ICC to reduce the risk of coming under US sanctions.
The ICC could attempt to work around the sanctions, but doing so would present significant challenges.
The US dollar plays a central role in international trade and finance. Washington can therefore exert considerable pressure on banks and financial institutions that rely on access to the US financial system.
Payments could still be made outside the dollar-based system, but institutions may become reluctant to process transactions involving a sanctioned organisation.
ICC President Judge Tomoko Akane previously urged the European Union to help protect the court through a so-called blocking statute.
Such a measure would allow the EU to prohibit European companies from complying with certain US sanctions that Brussels considers unlawful.
All EU member states are also members of the ICC. However, it remains uncertain whether the bloc would take such action if Washington imposes sanctions on the court as a whole.
Has the US Taken Similar Action Before?
The United States has previously sanctioned ICC personnel.
In 2020, during Trump’s first presidency, Washington imposed sanctions on individual court officials in response to an ICC investigation into alleged crimes involving Americans in Afghanistan.
However, targeting the entire ICC would go much further.
US sanctions have traditionally been used against foreign governments, individuals and organisations considered threats to American interests, including alleged terrorists, narcotics traffickers and armed groups.
Applying such measures to an international judicial institution responsible for prosecuting war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide would therefore represent a major escalation.
The exact timing of the proposed sanctions remains unclear.
The potential impact would depend partly on how broadly the US Treasury applies the restrictions and how other countries, banks and companies respond.
