ICC Judges Sue U.S. Over Sanctions, Call Them Unlawful

Three International Criminal Court judges on Wednesday sued U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration over sanctions imposed on them last year, arguing that the measures were unlawful.

In the lawsuit filed in federal court in Manhattan, judges Kimberly Prost of Canada, Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda and Reine Adelaide Sophie Alapini-Gansou of Benin said the sanctions were designed to exert extrajudicial pressure with the objective of punishing and coercing the judges.

A White House official said Trump lawfully exercised his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in imposing the sanctions, which the official said dealt with “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States involving the International Criminal Court, including the ICC’s illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America and our close ally Israel.”

“The Administration will continue to vigorously defend the President’s actions,” the official said. A State Department official said the ICC continues to “present a threat to our sovereignty and our national interests” and that the U.S. “will never allow unelected foreign judges to dictate terms.”

Origins Of The Sanctions

The Trump administration imposed sanctions on several ICC judges last year in unprecedented retaliation over the tribunal’s issuance of an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a past decision to investigate alleged war crimes by U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Sanctions severely hamper individuals’ ability to carry out routine financial transactions, as banks with U.S. ties or dollar transactions must comply with the restrictions.

The ICC, established in 2002, has jurisdiction to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes among its 125 member countries, though the U.S., China, Russia and Israel do not recognize its authority. The administration’s dislike of the court dates to Trump’s first term, when Washington sanctioned then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and an aide over the Afghanistan probe.

Judges Challenge Legal Basis

The lawsuit argues the sanctions exceeded IEEPA’s scope and lacked a genuine national emergency basis. “The Sanctions Regime … is designed to exert extra-judicial pressure on these judges and their colleagues on the ICC bench by targeting their financial and other personal interests, with the objective of punishing them for prior judicial decisions and coercing them into prioritizing their private interests over deciding cases on the basis of the law and facts,” the lawsuit said.

“Being subjected to such sanctions under IEEPA is tantamount to the financial death penalty. Due to the sanctions, Judges Prost, Bossa, and Alapini-Gansou are no longer able, among other things, to use credit cards; access banking services; use common online platforms, such as Amazon and Google; book travel; and in some cases, obtain health insurance,” it said. The judges added that the sanctions bar them from submitting evidence and argument in any pending or future proceedings.

(with input from Reuters)