Washington and Jerusalem are pressing the International Criminal Court (ICC) to remove its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, on grounds of alleged misconduct and what they describe as politically motivated warrant applications.

Khan’s recent warrant applications

Khan, who heads the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor in The Hague, submitted applications seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former defence minister Yoav Gallant and a senior Hamas commander. The moves have provoked diplomatic push‑back from the United States and Israel, which argue that the warrants threaten their leaders and national security.

Earlier in his tenure Khan has pursued warrants against Russian President Vladimir Putin, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte and senior Taliban figures, demonstrating a pattern of targeting high‑profile officials.

US and Israeli warnings

In April 2024 a group of US senators warned Khan that issuing a warrant against Netanyahu could expose the prosecutor to political retaliation. Khan proceeded with the applications despite the warning, prompting the United States and Israel to call for his dismissal, claiming the allegations of misconduct damage his credibility.

Allegations of sexual misconduct

An internal ICC judicial panel investigated claims that Khan had engaged in sexual misconduct. The panel concluded that the evidence was insufficient to establish wrongdoing. Nevertheless, the United States and Israel continue to argue that the allegations, however unproven, justify removal.

Member states are preparing a single vote that would address both the alleged serious misconduct and the question of Khan’s removal. Critics say merging the two questions could permit removal on the basis of an unproven claim or unrelated behaviour, such as a consensual relationship with a subordinate, which has not been alleged.

Political campaign against the ICC

On 13 July US Secretary of State Marco Rubio authored an op‑ed in The Wall Street Journal titled "Why We're Dismantling the International Criminal Court". Following the piece the US Treasury imposed sanctions on eleven senior ICC officials, including Khan, two deputy prosecutors and eight judges, freezing their accounts and blocking access to major payment platforms. Rubio described the campaign as defending national sovereignty against a "globalist elite".

The Financial Times reported that, during a May meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, former US President Donald Trump suggested that China and Russia join the United States in opposing the ICC.

European response

All European Union member states are parties to the Rome Statute, making the ICC’s status directly relevant to the EU. The European External Action Service warned that politicising the removal process would set a dangerous precedent for the court’s independence. The European Trade Union Confederation called the alleged misconduct a "pretext" and urged defence of legal accountability. Amnesty International’s European branch warned that a successful campaign against Khan could encourage other states to contest ICC jurisdiction in future conflicts.

Upcoming vote and possible outcomes

The ICC’s Assembly of States Parties is scheduled to vote later this month. EU delegates plan to argue for separate votes on the misconduct allegations and on Khan’s removal. If the vote does not remove Khan, the United States and Israel are expected to maintain economic and diplomatic pressure, potentially expanding sanctions and pursuing legal challenges. If Khan is removed, the ICC will need to appoint an interim prosecutor and organise a new election, with concerns that the process could be influenced by the same political forces that have driven the current campaign.