The International Criminal Court (ICC) is entering a critical phase of uncertainty regarding its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan. This development comes as member states gather for the Annual Assembly of State Parties (ASP) in The Hague. The session will occur while an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against Khan, outsourced to the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), remains pending.
Upcoming Assembly Meeting
Set to take place from December 1 to December 6, 2024, the ASP’s annual gathering is significant for the ICC, which is currently facing severe scrutiny. The investigation into Khan was expected to conclude by the end of October 2024. However, no public acknowledgment of the delays has been made by either the ASP or the OIOS, resulting in a prolonged state of limbo for the court.
Impact of the Investigation
The court has functioned without a chief prosecutor since May 2024, when Khan took a leave of absence concerning the misconduct allegations, which he vehemently denies. In his absence, deputy prosecutors have been managing ongoing cases. Despite facing pressure, sources indicate that Khan has no intentions of resigning.
- The ICC is experiencing unprecedented challenges, especially regarding its investigations into alleged war crimes in Gaza.
- Financial and visa sanctions have been imposed on Khan and several ICC officials by the prior U.S. administration, adding further complication.
Lack of Transparency in the Process
Despite significant media attention, the ASP has not provided updates regarding the investigation’s status or its timeline. Experts express concern over this lack of transparency, which may affect the court’s credibility and its ability to perform its duties. Sergey Vasiliev, an expert in international law, commented, “We are in uncharted territory, and it’s not clear how this will end.”
Consequences of the Ongoing Uncertainty
The delay in resolving the investigation has reportedly stalled critical actions, including potential arrest warrants related to Israeli officials on accusations of apartheid. Legal experts have warned that this stagnation could have dire implications for justice in ongoing and future cases.
Outsourcing the Investigation
The decision to outsource the investigation away from the ICC’s Independent Oversight Mechanism (IOM) has sparked considerable debate. ASP President Paivi Kaukoranta made this choice in November 2024, citing concerns about possible conflicts of interest and the need for a victim-centered approach.
- The IOM, established to handle such misconduct investigations, has faced criticism for its operational constraints.
- Experts have argued that the lack of a formal legal basis for outsourcing investigations raises serious concerns about procedural integrity.
Danya Chaikel of the International Federation for Human Rights stated that while outsourcing was necessary under the circumstances, the process lacked transparency. The IOM’s exclusion from the investigation has left many questions unanswered regarding procedural fairness and oversight.
The Way Forward
The OIOS is tasked with investigating the allegations and submitting its findings to a selected panel of judges. This panel will evaluate whether any misconduct has occurred. However, details about the panel’s members and methods remain undisclosed, contributing to the ongoing ambiguity surrounding the entire process.
Amid these challenges, the ICC’s future remains uncertain as the Assembly prepares to convene in a climate rife with critical questions about governance, transparency, and justice. The developments at this year’s ASP may have lasting implications for the integrity of the ICC and its leadership.
