International Criminal Court Moves Forward After Ousting Prosecutor Khan Over Misconduct Allegations

The International Criminal Court faced an uncertain path forward Saturday following the swift removal of its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, after a vote by the court’s 125 member states ended months of turbulence surrounding allegations of sexual misconduct. Khan, a British barrister, has consistently denied the accusations that he engaged in a sexual relationship with a female staffer and attempted to obstruct her complaints, matters documented by the Associated Press.

Friday’s vote proved remarkably decisive, with a substantial majority supporting Khan’s ouster. A procedural motion designed to complicate removal efforts failed in the morning session, prompting diplomats to accelerate the voting schedule by several hours. Iva Vukusic, a researcher at Utrecht University tracking the proceedings, noted the unexpected clarity of the outcome suggested greater consensus among member states than previously apparent.

Khan’s removal occurs as the tribunal confronts significant external pressure, including a U.S. campaign to undermine the institution’s authority. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced last week that Washington was pursuing a “sweeping campaign to dismantle the threat posed by the International Criminal Court to U.S. sovereignty.” The Trump administration has already imposed sanctions against Khan and a dozen other ICC personnel in response to the court’s investigations involving Israeli officials and American military personnel.

Diplomatic discussions held during Friday’s session revealed that countries with ongoing ICC investigations were preparing contingency plans for potential disruptions stemming from Khan’s departure. Officials speaking anonymously indicated that coalition-building efforts had begun before the final vote tallies were announced, demonstrating determination to preserve institutional continuity.

Hours after the removal vote, Venezuela announced its withdrawal from the court, contending that the tribunal’s operations reflect “demonstrated geographical bias.” Palestinian representatives quickly countered suggestions that Khan’s ouster represented a political decision affecting Gaza investigations, with Ambassador Ammar Hijazi asserting the removal vote was independent of pending situations before the court.

Khan’s departure will not immediately affect existing arrest warrants for Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, since only ICC judges possess authority to withdraw such orders. The prosecutor’s office indicated that Khan’s two deputy prosecutors, who have managed operations since his May 2025 resignation, will maintain leadership functions pending selection of a successor.

The search for Khan’s replacement remains uncertain in timing. His 2021 election required nearly 18 months and drew criticism from civil society organizations for insufficient vetting procedures regarding candidates’ adherence to “high moral character” standards. Khan intends to pursue legal challenges against the removal decision through available mechanisms, though no formal appeals process exists for his ouster—though he retains recourse to a special labor tribunal based in Geneva.

Khan’s legal team contested the removal process, arguing he was prevented from addressing the assembly and claiming procedural rules were modified to disadvantage him. Nevertheless, researchers and observers expressed optimism that the institution could now refocus on its core mandate of prosecuting individuals responsible for humanity’s most severe crimes.