Senior judges and prosecutors at the International Criminal Court (ICC) are navigating an extraordinary situation after being placed under U.S. sanctions normally used against terrorist leaders, organized crime figures, and hostile foreign officials. The measures, ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump, target nine ICC staff members, including six judges and the court’s chief prosecutor, in response to investigations involving U.S. and Israeli actions.
The sanctions represent a sharp escalation in Washington’s opposition to the Hague-based court. While the ICC has jurisdiction over crimes committed on the territory of its member states, the United States and Israel are not among the court’s 125 members. U.S. officials argue that any attempt by the court to scrutinize American or Israeli conduct violates national sovereignty.
Sweeping Restrictions With Immediate Consequences
The sanctions impose strict travel bans and financial restrictions not only on the sanctioned officials but also on their immediate family members. Entry into the United States is prohibited, and access to U.S.-linked banking, technology, and commercial services is severely limited.
Because U.S. law threatens companies with steep fines or criminal penalties for assisting sanctioned individuals, many firms respond by abruptly cutting off access. Banks freeze accounts, credit cards stop functioning, and digital services are withdrawn with little or no explanation. For those affected, the impact is sudden and deeply personal.
Chief Prosecutor Faces Financial and Digital Isolation
The ICC’s chief prosecutor, British national Karim Khan, was among those sanctioned. His bank accounts were closed, his U.S. visa was canceled, and his official ICC email service was terminated by Microsoft. These disruptions came during an already turbulent period for the court, as Khan stepped aside earlier this year while an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct proceeds. Khan has denied the allegations.
The loss of basic financial and communication tools has complicated the court’s daily operations and added strain to an institution already struggling with limited resources and an expanding caseload.
Judges Describe Daily Life Under Sanctions
Canadian judge Kimberly Prost, who was added to the sanctions list in August, said the effects were immediate and far-reaching. Her credit cards stopped working, and even consumer technologies connected to U.S. companies failed without warning.
Prost was sanctioned for her role in approving an ICC investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Afghanistan, including acts attributed to U.S. military and intelligence personnel. Before joining the ICC in 2017, she worked on sanctions policy at the United Nations Security Council, giving her firsthand knowledge of how aggressively companies enforce U.S. restrictions.
She has described the experience as deeply unsettling, noting the irony of spending a career in international justice only to be grouped with individuals associated with terrorism and organized crime.
Uncertainty Becomes a Daily Burden
For sanctioned officials, the unpredictability of enforcement has become one of the most exhausting aspects of daily life. Routine purchases can fail without explanation, and access to previously owned digital content can disappear. Even minor inconveniences accumulate, creating constant stress and uncertainty.
Peruvian judge Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza, who was sanctioned for her involvement in the same Afghanistan decision, said the consequences extend to family members. She noted that her daughters are now unable to attend professional conferences in the United States, limiting their career opportunities.
Deputy prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan has described the anxiety that comes with never knowing whether a malfunctioning payment card or service disruption is a technical error or another sanction-related cutoff.
Concerns Over the Court’s Future
Beyond personal hardship, ICC staff fear that the United States could broaden the sanctions to include the entire institution. Such a move could cripple the court’s ability to function, potentially preventing it from paying salaries, funding witness protection programs, or even maintaining basic facilities.
Some sanctioned officials are already under pressure from other governments. Several face arrest warrants issued by Russia, leaving them caught between competing global powers while attempting to carry out judicial duties.
The ICC’s Mandate and Its Limits
Founded in 2002, the ICC was created as a court of last resort to prosecute individuals responsible for the world’s most serious crimes, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression. It steps in only when national authorities are unwilling or unable to pursue justice.
The court has no police force and relies entirely on member states to carry out arrests. This makes the prospect of U.S. or Israeli officials appearing before the court highly unlikely. Still, individuals subject to ICC warrants risk detention when traveling abroad or after leaving office.
That risk became clear this year when the ICC took custody of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who is accused of crimes against humanity stemming from his violent anti-drug campaign.
The Trump administration has defended the sanctions as a necessary response to what it calls illegitimate actions by the ICC. The White House said the measures were designed to protect U.S. sovereignty and defend a close ally.
State Department officials have stated that the United States will not accept efforts to place American or Israeli nationals under what it views as the court’s unjust authority.
