ICC Prosecutor Says US Attacks Stem From Misunderstanding of Court

Attacks by US President Donald Trump’s administration against the International Criminal Court are rooted in a misunderstanding of the institution and its work, the court’s interim chief prosecutor has told AFP.

Mame Mandiaye Niang, speaking in an exclusive interview, rejected claims that the court poses an unacceptable threat to the interests or sovereignty of the United States.

“We have no interest in, nor is it our role to, infringe upon state sovereignty,” Niang said.

His comments come amid growing tensions between Washington and the ICC, after the Trump administration described the court as an “intolerable” threat to US interests.

The ICC, based in The Hague, investigates and prosecutes individuals accused of serious international crimes, including genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. It operates under the Rome Statute, which established the court as an independent judicial institution.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute and has long expressed concerns about the court’s authority over US citizens. Washington has also opposed ICC investigations involving countries that are not members of the court.

The Trump administration has taken a particularly confrontational position toward the institution, imposing measures against ICC officials and criticizing the court’s investigations and decisions.

Niang defended the court’s mandate and said its purpose was not to challenge the sovereignty of states. Instead, he said, the ICC operates within the legal framework established by the countries that created it.

The prosecutor’s remarks come as the court faces pressure over its investigations into conflicts and alleged international crimes involving powerful states and political leaders.

The ICC has argued that its jurisdiction is limited by international law and that cases are generally pursued when national authorities are unwilling or unable to genuinely investigate or prosecute alleged crimes.

Critics, including US officials, have questioned the court’s jurisdiction and accused it of exceeding its authority. The Trump administration has said the ICC’s actions can interfere with US sovereignty and national interests.

The dispute highlights a broader divide over the role of international institutions in addressing alleged crimes committed during conflicts.

Niang’s comments indicate that the ICC intends to defend its independence while rejecting allegations that it seeks to exercise authority over sovereign governments without legal grounds.

The confrontation between Washington and the court is likely to remain a significant issue as the ICC continues investigations into alleged crimes in several parts of the world.

For the court, the challenge is to maintain its investigations and judicial work while facing opposition from governments that question its jurisdiction. For the United States, the dispute reflects longstanding concerns over whether an international court should have authority to investigate or prosecute individuals connected to countries that have not accepted its founding treaty.