International concern over withdrawal from the International Criminal Court
The leadership of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute has expressed deep unease regarding the announced withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the International Criminal Court (ICC). In a formal statement, the Assembly’s president emphasized that such a move could undermine global efforts to combat impunity and weaken the framework of international justice.
The president of the Assembly, Päivi Kaukoranta, voiced regret over the decision, stressing that the departure of these three Sahelian nations may disrupt international cooperation in criminal justice. She reiterated the ICC’s role as a cornerstone of the global justice system and urged the countries to reconsider their stance, urging continued participation in the Assembly’s proceedings.
Dialogue over withdrawal: a call for continued engagement
The Assembly’s leadership highlighted existing mechanisms within the Rome Statute that allow member states to address their concerns directly. Rather than pursuing withdrawal, the presidency encouraged dialogue as the most effective means of resolving disputes and ensuring the ICC’s continued relevance. It also clarified that any withdrawal would not absolve a state of its obligations incurred while it was a party to the treaty.
Niger’s formal exit and the road ahead
The ICC received an official notification of Niger’s withdrawal on June 18, 2026, as required by the Rome Statute. Under the treaty’s provisions, this withdrawal will take legal effect one year later, on June 18, 2027. The move follows a joint statement from the Alliance of Sahel States (AES)—comprising Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger—in September 2025, announcing their intention to leave the Court.
The AES leaders, including Mali’s transitional President Assimi Goïta, cited allegations that the ICC had failed to effectively prosecute perpetrators of grave crimes and accused the Court of operating with a bias they described as “selective.” They argued that the ICC had become a tool of “neocolonial repression” and criticized its perceived inaction against certain crimes while disproportionately targeting actors outside the sphere of institutionalized impunity.