125 countries to vote Friday on permanent removal of ICC chief accused of sexual misconduct
Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- The International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, faces a vote on his permanent removal due to accusations of sexual misconduct.
- Khan denies the allegations, which stem from a relationship with a female aide and attempts to prevent her from pursuing her claims.
- His fate rests with 125 member states, while the U.S. has separately sought to dismantle the court, and the Netherlands has announced its vote for removal.
The International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, is facing a critical vote by 125 member states that could lead to his permanent removal from office. The decision comes after accusations of sexual misconduct with a female aide, allegations that Khan has consistently denied. The situation has cast a shadow over the global tribunal, which is already under significant international scrutiny.
Khan was formally suspended from his duties in June after the court's oversight body found he had committed a "serious breach of duty and serious misconduct." Documents revealed by The Associated Press detailed a "sexual relationship" that escalated over time and alleged attempts by Khan to suppress the woman's claims. Khan disputes these findings, and his legal team has protested his absence from the upcoming closed-door meeting, arguing that barring him from being heard violates fair legal principles.
The vote occurs amid broader challenges for the ICC. The United States, a long-time critic of the court, has launched a campaign to dismantle the institution. Khan himself is barred from entering the U.S. due to the ICC's investigation into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant regarding the conduct of the IDF in Gaza. The Netherlands, the court's host nation, is the only country to have publicly declared its intention to vote for Khan's removal.
Adding to the complexity, Khan is currently suspended from practicing law in the UK pending a separate investigation by the British Bar Standards Board. The outcome of the secret vote remains uncertain, with the court's operations and credibility hanging in the balance.
We know of no court or tribunal in any proper and fair legal system that bars a person facing the gravest professional sanction from being heard.
Originally published by Times of Israel. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.