WASHINGTON — The United States announced on 18 August that it had imposed sanctions on International Criminal Court (ICC) President Tomoko Akane and senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye, marking a further escalation in a long-running campaign by the Trump administration against the Hague-based court.
Washington cites prosecutions without state consent
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the sanctions target the two officials for their roles in ICC efforts to "prosecute officials whose government has not consented to ICC jurisdiction", the announcement said. The move follows a pattern of punitive measures against the court that the administration has criticised as exceeding its mandate.
The ICC, which was established in 2002 to investigate and prosecute war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, said it "stands behind its staff" and warned that such measures undermine the rule of law. The BBC report noted the United States is not a member of the court, while more than 120 states are party to the Rome Statute, which created the ICC.
"We will not tolerate its assault on state sovereignty," the US statement quoted by the BBC said, reflecting the administration's longstanding position that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over officials of states that have not consented.
Context of earlier measures and recent targets
The Trump administration has previously announced sanctions on at least 11 ICC officials, including judges and the chief prosecutor, according to the report. Those earlier measures have included asset freezes, travel restrictions and limits on services from US companies. Targeted measures were previously adopted in response to ICC investigations into alleged crimes by US personnel in Afghanistan and to arrest warrants issued for senior Israeli officials.
The current sanctions specifically name Tomoko Akane, a judge from Japan who began a three-year term as ICC president in 2024, and Abdoulaye Seye, a Senegalese national who serves as a senior trial lawyer. Seye was reported to be part of a prosecution team that sought an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; the report also said he had been nominated for an ICC judgeship.
- Sanctioned individuals: Tomoko Akane (Japan) and Abdoulaye Seye (Senegal)
- US rationale: Engagement in ICC investigations and prosecutions involving officials of non-consenting governments
- Broader context: Part of a sequence of US measures against ICC officials, including reprisals over probes into Afghanistan and warrants involving Israeli leaders
Implications for the international legal order
The BBC story emphasises the clash between Washington and the ICC as an illustration of tensions over sovereignty, accountability and the reach of international institutions. The US characterisation of the court as "corrupt and fatally politicised" was set against the ICC's insistence that threatening judicial actors risks the integrity of the international legal order.
Observers note that the dispute involves questions many states and legal institutions continue to debate: the balance between state sovereignty and international accountability mechanisms; the reach of courts that operate with jurisdiction accepted by their member states; and the practical consequences of punitive measures that can include asset freezes and travel limitations.
| Sanctioned individual | Nationality | Role at ICC |
|---|---|---|
| Tomoko Akane | Japan | ICC President (term began 2024) |
| Abdoulaye Seye | Senegal | Senior trial lawyer; part of team pursuing warrant against Israeli PM |
Washington's actions have diplomatic repercussions. The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute; nevertheless, the imposition of sanctions on high-ranking ICC personnel places governments that cooperate with the court in a delicate position. The BBC report also noted the entry of the State of Palestine into the court in 2015, which enabled ICC scrutiny of alleged crimes on Palestinian territory and has been a flashpoint in the wider controversy.
For South Africa and other states that are party to the Rome Statute, the dispute raises practical and normative questions about engagement with the ICC and how to protect the independence of judicial actors who operate under its mandate. The tension between national political considerations and obligations under international criminal law is likely to remain a contentious issue among ICC members and observers.
This latest sanctioning move by the US administration underscores how disputes over international justice can spill into wider diplomatic arenas, with consequences for cooperation between states, courts and civil society that supports accountability for the gravest crimes.
