ICC member states vote to remove chief prosecutor Karim Khan
Diplomatic sources reported that member states of the International Criminal Court voted on Friday to dismiss Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, marking the first time in the court's history that a sitting prosecutor has been removed from office. The vote took place during a closed-door session at the United Nations headquarters in New York, with 82 of the ICC's 125 member states voting in favour of his removal, 13 voting against, and 15 abstaining, according to multiple diplomatic sources.
Khan, a British barrister who became ICC prosecutor in 2021, was accused of sexual misconduct by a female member of his staff. The allegations first emerged nearly two years ago and led to an external investigation by the court's oversight body. Khan has consistently denied all allegations and maintains that the investigation was flawed. His lawyer, Tayab Ali, said on X that Khan will challenge the lawfulness and fairness of the decision through all available legal mechanisms.
Background and disciplinary process
The dismissal follows a disciplinary process that began after the allegations surfaced. Khan was temporarily suspended in June after a report by the executive committee of the court's oversight body found that he had committed "serious misconduct." According to findings cited by the Associated Press, investigators concluded that Khan engaged in an inappropriate sexual relationship with a female staff member and later attempted to discourage her from pursuing her complaints. The woman, who asked to be identified by her first name, Sarah, gave an account of the allegations in an interview with CNN, describing "an escalation of attempts" that resulted in physical assault. She said there was "no way for something to be consensual when you have such a power disparity."
Khan's lawyers have called the process unlawful, procedurally unfair, and unsupported by evidence. They also warned that the vote could endanger the independence of future prosecutors.
International reaction and implications
Khan's removal comes amid rising pressure on the ICC. In 2024, the court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over the Gaza war, as well as leading members of the Hamas militant group. The warrants sparked fierce condemnation from Israel and the United States, neither of which is a member of the court.
The United States has imposed sanctions on Khan and other ICC staff, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently announced a renewed diplomatic campaign to "dismantle" the ICC, accusing the court of threatening American sovereignty. During a visit to the Philippines, Rubio said there were "lunatics and crazies involved in the ICC" and that no US political or military officials would ever go on trial at the court.
Despite Khan's dismissal, all active ICC warrants will remain in place, as only ICC judges have the authority to withdraw warrants. "All active ICC warrants will remain in place despite Khan's dismissal, because only ICC judges have the authority to withdraw warrants," reported Deutsche Welle.
Reactions to the dismissal
Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch and now a visiting professor at Princeton University, wrote on X that the ICC states did "the right thing" by removing Khan. Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, criticized Khan's actions in a statement posted on X after the dismissal.
According to a diplomatic source quoted by TASS, European states and major donor countries played a key role in ensuring the necessary majority for Khan's removal, with the decision connected not only to the accusations but also to a loss of confidence in him as a leader. The court's host state, the Netherlands, said it voted for his removal, as did France and Norway, which made their decisions public ahead of the meeting.
Perspectives
Supporters of the dismissal argue that the decision upholds the court's integrity and accountability. Kenneth Roth stated that removing Khan was "the right thing," and diplomats described the dismissal as an important step in reinforcing confidence in the Hague-based institution.
Khan's defense maintains that he is innocent and that the process was flawed. His lawyers called the vote unlawful and procedurally unfair, and Khan will file a legal challenge. In an open letter, his attorneys said that no wrongdoing had been proven and warned that the vote could endanger the independence of future prosecutors.
Critics of Khan's actions in relation to Israel, such as Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon, argued that Khan's "political witch hunt against Israel and outrageous arrest warrants" were an attempt to distract from the serious misconduct allegations against him.