The Global Initiative Against Impunity (GIAI), which includes prominent organizations like the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC), Redress, Trial International, and Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ), has condemned the announced withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). This move represents a significant setback, undermining decades of African leadership in the global fight against impunity and weakening both the ICC and the broader project of international justice at a time when unity is most critical.
September 26, 2025. The withdrawal cannot take immediate effect.
On September 22, the three member states of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES)—Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger—announced their withdrawal from the ICC, claiming it would take immediate effect. However, under Article 127 of the Rome Statute, a state must submit a written notification to the UN Secretary-General to withdraw from the Statute, and the withdrawal only becomes effective one year after this notification. Until then, Sahel States remain fully bound by their obligations under the Rome Statute, including the duty to cooperate with the Court. The withdrawal does not affect ongoing proceedings for crimes committed before its effective date.
Currently, cases related to the situation in Mali, referred to the Court by the Malian government in July 2012, are ongoing before the ICC. The reparations process in the Al Mahdi case is nearing completion. Al Mahdi was convicted on September 27, 2016, for intentionally directing attacks against religious and historic buildings in Timbuktu. Additionally, the Court is expected to rule in the coming months on reparations in the Al Hassan case, following his conviction on June 26, 2024, for war crimes and crimes against humanity also committed in Timbuktu. An arrest warrant remains outstanding against Iyad Ag Ghaly, the alleged leader of Ansar Dine, a jihadist group active in Mali.
A retreat from leadership: victims left behind
African states played a pivotal role in establishing the Court in 1998, widely ratifying the Rome Statute and even referring national situations to the Court’s jurisdiction. This commitment provided victims of the gravest crimes with a vital international ally when justice at the national level was unattainable. The announced withdrawal contradicts this legacy of leadership, leaving victims with fewer avenues to seek justice.
This decision follows the January 2025 exit of the three states from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), another institution they helped shape and which had built a strong human rights record through its Court of Justice. These withdrawals mark a regression in the fight against impunity, leaving victims without recourse, weakening human rights protections, and deepening isolation at a time when regional and international cooperation are essential, particularly in countries grappling with atrocities linked to terrorism.
“The decision to withdraw from the ICC weakens the situation of victims, for whom the Court often represents their last hope for justice. After leaving ECOWAS, the loss of ICC protection leaves victims in Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger without recourse for the most serious human rights violations they continue to endure,” stated Drissa Traoré, Secretary-General of FIDH. “In these countries facing multidimensional crises, national jurisdictions remain unable to provide justice and reparations to victims due to a lack of political will and an inability to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity.“
A blow to vulnerable international justice
The announced withdrawals from the ICC come as international justice faces mounting pressures. Earlier this year, Hungary also announced its intention to leave the Rome Statute, a decision widely criticized for undermining the global fight against impunity.
While the ICC has faced criticism in the past for the selectivity of its cases and its perceived overemphasis on Africa, the Court has progressively worked to strengthen the universality of its mandate. It has expanded its focus beyond the African continent, with ongoing investigations and cases in Afghanistan, Bangladesh/Myanmar, Palestine, Ukraine, Venezuela, Libya, and the Philippines. Recent arrests of suspects in Libya and the former President Rodrigo Duterte demonstrate that no region or high-level official is beyond the reach of justice. This universality enhances the Court’s legitimacy but also makes it more vulnerable to political attacks.
“States parties must show resilience and reaffirm their commitment to the Court, the fight against impunity, and the rights of victims worldwide,” emphasized Alix Vuillemin, Executive Director of Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ). “At a time when the Court faces increasing attacks, states must move toward universality, not retreat. Turning away now only strengthens impunity.“
The role of states in preserving international norms
The ICC’s role in international justice is significant. It does not replace but complements existing mechanisms such as truth-seeking processes and transitional justice initiatives, which are essential for sustainable peace. The Rome Statute enshrines key principles that underpin international justice: no immunity for heads of state, complementarity with national jurisdictions, and the rights of victims to participate in judicial processes and seek reparations. Withdrawing from the Statute risks weakening these protections at the national level and compromising decades of progress in establishing global norms against impunity.
The GIAI urges all ICC State Parties to reaffirm their commitment to the Rome Statute. As victims in Africa and worldwide face escalating violence, preserving the ICC as a court of last resort is essential.
