The American government announced on Friday that it was sanctioning the International Criminal Court (ICC), a few hours after former South African judge Navi Pillay was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, notably for her work within the institution.
Washington justifies these sanctions by its desire to “defend American sovereignty and its citizens against the threat posed by the International Criminal Court”, according to a press release published by the State Department.
“They want more power and want it at our expense,” insisted US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, describing the ICC as a “rogue court”.
The Court immediately reacted, estimating in a press release that these sanctions were “an attack against the rule of law and the very foundations of the international legal order, which strikes a blow to the fundamental principle according to which no one is above the law”. And to warn that “history will judge this moment”.
The European Union reacted by deploring the “deeply regrettable” United States sanctions and promised to help the institution continue its missions. “It is deeply regrettable that the United States has announced its intention to impose sanctions, and “the EU is ready to take all necessary measures to enable the Court to continue its work,” the European Commission said in a statement.
“Cut her off from her resources”
“Republicans and Democrats alike have always rejected the idea that the ICC can prosecute American citizens, members of our armed forces or political leaders. The United States has never joined this Court, we do not need it and we do not want it,” Mr. Rubio said in a statement.
Scheduled for a period of 180 days, these sanctions result in a ban on any financial transaction with the ICC, in order to “cut it off from its resources and reduce its ability to operate” according to the Secretary of State.
“We hope to see our allies calm the Court’s ardor. Otherwise, the United States will continue to dismantle the ICC, brick by brick, until Americans can no longer be threatened,” he added. The period may be adjusted “in response to the success or failure of these efforts.”
According to Mr. Rubio, these sanctions are justified by the desire of “globalist experts” across the oceans to push the Court to “do more, in particular by launching proceedings against Americans. Soldiers who defend their country. Border agents who protect our nation.
While he assures that the United States has sought a “diplomatic solution”, he believes that “neither the Court nor the State parties have so far taken the slightest measure to take our concerns into account”.
The sanctions do not, however, concern software maintenance or service activities and access to the “cloud”, as well as the operation of the ICC retirement system or certain activities linked to persons detained by the Court.
