The International Criminal Court (ICC) is headless at a time of acute need. It has been some 11 months since the accusation became public that the court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, sexually assaulted a female lawyer in his office. He denies the accusation and has, appropriately, taken a temporary leave of absence beginning in May 2025 while the U.N.’s Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) conducts an investigation.
We don’t know what happened between Khan and his staff member, but as two longtime supporters of the court, we are deeply concerned by the effect of this development on this important institution. We urge the 125 governments that have joined the court—the Assembly of States Parties—to request the OIOS to finalize the report of the investigation, which soon will have been pending for a year.
In Khan’s absence, two deputies have assumed his duties temporarily, and the prosecutor’s office continues to do important work. Most recently, trials have proceeded and convictions have been secured for two Central African Republic militia leaders.
Yet many important issues are on hold, evidently too controversial for the deputies to advance. Someone of the stature of Khan, or a permanent replacement, is needed to take the heat for these decisions.
For example, the prosecutor’s office is reported to have been preparing to seek arrest warrants for two Israeli far-right ministers, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, for expanding Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank. Yet no charges have been made public, and it is unclear whether the matter has advanced.
In 2024, Khan filed charges and successfully sought arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for starving and depriving Palestinian civilians in Gaza. However, no one has been charged for Israel’s use of lethal force in Gaza, such as the dropping of enormous 2,000-pound bombs that indiscriminately decimated Palestinian neighborhoods, or the shooting and killing of starving Palestinian civilians as they sought food from Israeli-backed distribution points.
The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has imposed sanctions on Khan, his two deputies, and six judges. This move was in retaliation for the charges against Netanyahu and Gallant, and an investigation in Afghanistan that might theoretically have implicated Americans for torture there. Article 70 of the court’s treaty prohibits any threat or intimidation of court officials or retaliation against them because of their official duties. No one, however, has been charged for this blatant obstruction of justice.
In Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin has been charged for kidnapping Ukrainian children but not for targeting Ukrainian civilians or civilian infrastructure. Four Russian military commanders have been charged for targeting Ukraine’s electrical infrastructure. It is inconceivable that they would have acted without Putin’s approval, yet Putin has not been charged for his command responsibility.
In Africa, the prosecutor’s office is investigating the renewed genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region and the renewed armed conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, but no charges have been made public. Most significantly, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has been arming the genocidal Rapid Support Forces militia in Sudan, and Rwandan has been directing and fighting alongside the brutal M23 militia in eastern Congo, yet no UAE or Rwandan official has been charged for aiding and abetting atrocities.
In short, there are important cases to pursue and the ICC needs a fully vested chief prosecutor who is capable of making these tough decisions.
Moreover, the accusations against Khan continue to provide political cover for countries facing investigation. The Israeli government, for example, has suggested that the charges against Netanyahu and Gallant were filed to divert attention from Khan’s alleged behavior. This is rich, given that Israel’s Mossad has been surreptitiously spying on the prosecutor’s office, and has threatened both Khan and his predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, for investigating Israeli officials.
When the sexual assault accusations against Khan were first made, he could have resigned. Instead he denied and contested the allegations, as is his right. But the ensuing investigation has proceeded at a snail’s pace. According to our contacts at the court, only one investigator has been assigned, and there has been no public account of the findings.
It is urgent that this investigation be wrapped up expeditiously and the report be made public. If it affirms the allegations, Khan should resign. If it rejects them, he should resume his responsibilities. If the facts remain unclear, the Assembly of States Parties should make the best assessment it can of the facts, vote on the matter, and resolve it, pro or con. A majority of the members can remove a chief prosecutor. A quick search would then be needed to identify a replacement.
It is deeply unfortunate that, at a moment when we need the ICC to deliver justice in the world’s most challenging places, it finds itself paralyzed by allegations against its chief prosecutor. Member states have a duty to move beyond this stalemate without further delay. The report on Khan’s conduct should be published, in full, and the matter definitively resolved.