International court voices concerns over Sahel states’ withdrawal

The presidency of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) to the Rome Statute recently expressed its deep apprehension regarding the stated intention of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC). This move, they believe, could significantly undermine global efforts to combat impunity for serious crimes, impacting African current affairs and international justice.

In an official statement, ASP President Päivi Kaukoranta conveyed regret over this development. She highlighted that the departure of these three nations risks jeopardizing crucial international cooperation in criminal justice matters. Kaukoranta reaffirmed the ICC’s vital role as a cornerstone of the global justice system and urged the countries to reconsider their decision, remain parties to the Rome Statute, and continue their engagement within the Assembly’s framework.

The ASP presidency further emphasized the existence of internal mechanisms within the Assembly for member states to address and articulate their concerns, advocating for a path of dialogue. It also served as a reminder that a withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not absolve a state of its obligations incurred during its period as a signatory to the treaty.

This stance from the international body follows the formal notification of Niger’s withdrawal. The ICC confirmed that it received the notification on June 18, 2026, which was transmitted to the United Nations Secretary-General, the depositary of the Rome Statute. In accordance with the treaty’s provisions, Niger’s withdrawal will officially take effect on June 18, 2027.

The decision by Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger was initially announced in September 2025 by the leaders of the Confederation of Sahel States (AES). In a joint communiqué, signed by General Assimi Goïta, the transitional president of Mali and then-current chairman of the AES, the states accused the Court of failing to effectively prosecute perpetrators of the most egregious crimes, decrying what they termed as “selective justice.” The AES further characterized the ICC as an “instrument of neocolonial repression,” criticizing its perceived silence on certain offenses while allegedly targeting actors outside what they described as the “circle of beneficiaries of institutionalized international impunity.” This raises significant questions for African governance and continent news.