The Global Initiative Against Impunity (GIAI)—a coalition including the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CCPI), Redress, Trial International, and Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice—has strongly condemned the announced withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). This move represents a significant setback that undermines decades of African leadership in the global fight against impunity. It not only weakens the ICC but also the broader project of international justice, especially at a time when unity is critical.
Why the immediate withdrawal isn’t possible
September 26, 2025. The withdrawal of the Sahel states from the ICC cannot take effect instantly.
On September 22, the three members of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES)—Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger—announced their intention to leave the ICC with immediate effect. However, according to Article 127 of the Rome Statute, a state must submit a written notification to the United Nations Secretary-General to withdraw from the treaty, and the withdrawal only becomes effective one year after this notification. Until then, the Sahel states remain fully bound by their obligations under the Rome Statute, including the duty to cooperate with the Court. The withdrawal will not affect ongoing proceedings related to crimes committed before the effective date of withdrawal.
Currently, cases related to the situation in Mali—referred to the Court by the Malian government in July 2012—are ongoing at the ICC. The reparations process in the Al Mahdi case is nearing completion. Al Mahdi was sentenced on September 27, 2016, for intentionally directing attacks against religious and historic buildings in Timbuktu. Additionally, the Court is expected to rule within the coming months on reparations in the Al Hassan case, following his conviction on June 26, 2024, for war crimes and crimes against humanity also committed in Timbuktu. An arrest warrant remains active against Iyad Ag Ghaly, the alleged leader of Ansar Dine, a jihadist group active in Mali.
A leadership void leaving victims without recourse
African states played a pivotal role in the creation of the ICC in 1998, widely ratifying the Rome Statute and even referring national situations to the Court. This commitment provided victims of the most serious crimes with a vital international ally when justice at the national level was unattainable. The announced withdrawal contradicts this legacy of leadership, leaving victims with fewer avenues to seek justice.
This decision follows the January 2025 departure of the three states from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), another institution they helped shape and which has a strong human rights track record through its Court of Justice. These withdrawals signal a regression in the fight against impunity, leaving victims without recourse, weakening human rights protections, and increasing isolation at a time when regional and international cooperation are essential—particularly in countries grappling with terrorism-related atrocities.
“The decision to withdraw from the ICC undermines the situation of victims, for whom the Court often represents their last hope for justice. After leaving ECOWAS, the loss of ICC protection leaves victims in Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger without recourse for the most serious human rights violations they continue to endure,” stated Drissa Traoré, Secretary-General of FIDH. “In these countries facing multidimensional crises, national courts remain unable to deliver justice and reparations to victims due to a lack of political will and an inability to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
Weakening international justice at a vulnerable moment
The announced withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger comes as international justice faces growing pressures. Earlier this year, Hungary also announced its intention to leave the Rome Statute, a move widely criticized as undermining the global fight against impunity.
While the ICC has faced past criticism for the selectivity of its cases and its perceived disproportionate focus on Africa, the Court has gradually worked to broaden the universality of its mandate. It has expanded its scope far beyond the African continent, with ongoing investigations and cases in Afghanistan, Bangladesh/Myanmar, Palestine, Ukraine, Venezuela, Libya, and the Philippines. Recent arrests of Libyan suspects and the former President Rodrigo Duterte demonstrate that no region or high-ranking official is beyond the reach of justice. This universality strengthens the Court’s legitimacy but also makes it more vulnerable to political attacks.
“States parties must show resilience and reaffirm their commitment to the Court, the fight against impunity, and the rights of victims worldwide,” emphasized Alix Vuillemin, Executive Director of Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ). “At a time when the Court is under increasing attack, states must move toward universality, not retreat. Turning away now only reinforces impunity.”
The critical role of states in preserving international norms
The ICC’s role in international justice is significant. It does not replace but complements existing mechanisms such as truth-seeking processes and transitional justice initiatives, which are vital for sustainable peace. The Rome Statute enshrines key principles that underpin international justice: no immunity for heads of state, complementarity with national jurisdictions, and the rights of victims to participate in judicial processes and seek reparations. The withdrawal from the Statute risks weakening these protections at the national level and undermining decades of progress in establishing global norms against impunity.
The GIAI urges all states parties to the ICC to reaffirm their commitment to the Rome Statute. As victims in Africa and worldwide face escalating violence, preserving the ICC as a court of last resort is essential.
