International Criminal Court members face warnings not to override the misconduct process against chief prosecutor Karim Khan in a crunch vote on Friday.
The accusations of sexual misconduct have triggered concerns over the future of the court itself as divisions deepen.
Mr Khan’s defenders have sought to portray the vote as procedurally flawed and heavily politicised by the Trump administration. Washington imposed sanctions against the British KC after his decision in November 2024 to seek arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant.
The 125 ICC member countries will vote on Friday, with an absolute majority required to remove Mr Khan. While the vote is secret, media reports have indicated that western nations largely favour dropping Mr Khan. The Netherlands, where the ICC sits, publicly stated last week that it supports his removal.
Mr Khan’s lawyers argue the procedure has been opaque and goes against the conclusion reached in March by an ad hoc panel of three judges commissioned to examine a 150-page report by the UN office for internal oversight service. In a non-binding advisory opinion, they concluded that it did not establish misconduct. The ICC’s governing body, composed of 21 states, overruled them and voted in June to suspend Mr Khan, paving the way for Friday’s vote.
‘Powerful few’
In a message published on X, Mr Khan’s lawyer Tayab Ali said on Tuesday his client had been barred from attending the voting session. “What we are witnessing is the powerful few, disappointed by the impartiality of the judges they appointed, now seeking to shape the process that they hope will deliver the desired outcome,” Mr Ali said.
In a letter sent to the Dutch Parliament last week and viewed by The National, Dutch Foreign Minister Tom Berendsen and Justice Minister David van Weel said the decision to overrule the judges was based on the UN investigation, underlying documents, the judges’ advice and written statements submitted during the proceedings.
All these documents remain confidential. Leaks obtained by TheNew York Times show that while the judges’ panel did find Mr Khan had engaged in “non-consensual sexual contact” with a staff member, they added that evidence did not meet the legal standard for misconduct. Mr Khan denies the accusations against him.
Serious misconduct is one of the reasons that can be invoked to remove a chief prosecutor at the ICC, who must also be of “high moral character,” the Dutch letter stated. “The government deeply regrets the situation that has arisen and sympathises with everyone affected by it,” the letter said. “Together with other States Parties, the Netherlands remains committed to the effective functioning of the International Criminal Court.”
‘Defanging’ the court
In a signal of the extraordinary circumstances shaping the coming vote, a number of public figures have weighed in as Mr Khan’s alleged victim went public for the first time.
In a new column published on Friday headlined The subversion of the International Criminal Court, former EU foreign affairs minister Josep Borrell defended Mr Khan, saying his case was “obviously part of a larger offensive against the ICC”.
Mr Borrell traced it back to US senators threatening Mr Khan with sanctions in April 2024 if he issued arrest warrants against Mr Netanyahu. Last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also published a commentary inThe Wall Street Journal headlined Why we’redismantling the ICC, in which he argued the international body was seeking to override the authority of sovereign states.
“The Trump administration and Netanyahu want the same thing: to ensure that no international court can touch soldiers, border agents, or its chosen allies, no matter how serious the allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity,” Mr Borrell said. “Both see the ‘Khan scandal’ as the perfect occasion to defang the court.”
Mr Khan has stopped short of making such accusations himself, but said in an interview two months ago: “There’s a degree of unpredictability on the other side of the Atlantic we haven’t seen in many decades, if ever.” Neither the US nor Israel are members of the ICC.
Mr Borrell has been among Europe‘s fiercest critics of Israel. His position on Mr Khan appeared to be echoed by Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares, who posted on X: “I reaffirm my support for the International Criminal Court and its work: accountability and protecting victims. It must do so without interference or pressure.”
Conflating issues
A Malaysian lawyer in her thirties at the heart of the sexual misconduct scandal affecting Mr Khan told CNN last week that she had stayed silent until then because she was worried about affecting the court’s work. She says she suffered sexual harassment at the hands of Mr Khan between March 2023 and April 2024.
Known only by her first name, Sara declined to discuss specifics about the case, but was reported to be worried about derailing the ICC’s arrest warrants against Israeli leaders.
The close timing between the first leaks of the misconduct allegations and Mr Khan’s arrest warrant applications fuelled speculation that Sara was an Israeli agent seeking to undermine the ICC. She flatly denied the rumours, saying she had gone through the ICC’s highest-level security clearance.
She appeared to support the view that two things can be true simultaneously: that her allegations against Mr Khan are genuine and that Israel and its supporters have also sought to weaponise them. “I can’t speak to any specific state or individual, but I think many parties have for their own agenda conflated the two things,” Sara said.
“What I do know is that my complaint was because what happened to me – not for any other reason. Second, that conflation has only helped to distract and deflect from the validity of that complaint. The two things need to be separated.”
