Exclusive: ICC member states to vote on Karim Khan probe in New York on 24 July

An international tribunal is set to face a pivotal moment on 24 July when member states of the International Criminal Court (ICC) will gather in New York to decide the fate of its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan. This vote comes amid ongoing scrutiny surrounding allegations of misconduct against Khan, who has been suspended since early June following a contentious internal review process. The decision to suspend Khan was made by the Bureau of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP), the governing body of the ICC, despite a judicial panel having previously determined there was no evidence of wrongdoing.

The ASP, composed of representatives from the 125 member states of the ICC, holds the authority to determine whether Khan committed serious misconduct, less serious misconduct, or no misconduct at all. According to the court’s procedural guidelines, any finding of misconduct must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the states present and voting. If such a finding is upheld, the ASP will then proceed to a second vote on whether to remove Khan from his position, requiring an absolute majority of 63 votes among the 125 members.

The controversy began in May 2024 when allegations of sexual misconduct surfaced against Khan. These claims led to an independent investigation commissioned by the ASP, which opted to outsource the inquiry to the United Nations. Both the complainant and Khan cooperated with the UN-led probe, which amassed over 5,000 pages of evidence over the course of more than a year. The findings were submitted to a panel of judges appointed by the ASP in December 2024, and after extensive deliberation, the panel concluded that the evidence did not support claims of misconduct or breach of duty. However, the ASP chose to override this recommendation, leading to Khan's suspension.

This move has raised concerns among legal experts regarding the potential politicization of the ICC's internal affairs. Some argue that the ASP's decision to ignore the judicial panel's findings could undermine the court's credibility and impartiality. Meanwhile, the situation has occurred concurrently with broader geopolitical tensions, particularly between the United States and its allies on one side and Khan on the other, concerning the pursuit of a war crimes investigation into Israeli officials related to the conflict in Gaza.

In addition to the internal disciplinary proceedings, external developments have also impacted Khan's tenure. In a separate but related matter, the UK's Bar Standards Board (BSB) announced that it has imposed an interim suspension on Karim Khan, citing concerns over his conduct. This action adds another layer of complexity to the already delicate situation surrounding the ICC's chief prosecutor.

As the date for the critical vote approaches, the international community watches closely, aware that the outcome could significantly influence the direction of the ICC and its role in global justice. The coming weeks will likely see increased diplomatic activity and public discourse around the issue, with stakeholders from various countries preparing their positions ahead of the anticipated decision. The resolution of this case remains uncertain, yet it underscores the importance of maintaining transparency and integrity within international judicial institutions.