A bruising ICC scandal heads to a secret vote on removing chief prosecutor

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has removed its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, following allegations of sexual misconduct. The move follows a vote by the Assembly of States Parties, the ICC’s 125-member governing body, which determined that Khan had committed “serious misconduct.” Khan, who led the court since 2021, was suspended in June 2026 pending the outcome of disciplinary proceedings. His removal marks the first time in the ICC’s history that a sitting chief prosecutor has been ousted from office. The allegations involve a junior female staffer in Khan’s office, with the woman identifying herself as Sarah in a recent CNN interview. She described the alleged misconduct as nonconsensual, citing the power imbalance inherent in their relationship. Khan has consistently denied the accusations, and his legal team has criticized the process as legally flawed and lacking sufficient evidence. The vote to remove Khan took place amid ongoing controversy surrounding his role in issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. These warrants, issued in November 2024, sparked sharp criticism from both Israel and the United States, neither of which is a member of the ICC. The warrants became a focal point in New York City politics when Mayor Zohran Mamdani referenced them during his campaign, vowing to pursue Netanyahu if the Israeli leader visited the city. As mayor, Mamdani acknowledged the city lacked the authority to enforce the warrant but urged the federal government to take action. This political dimension added pressure on the ICC, already facing scrutiny over its operations and legitimacy. Khan’s removal followed a protracted process that began in May 2025, when he voluntarily stepped aside while a United Nations oversight investigation into the allegations was conducted. In June 2026, he was formally suspended pending the final vote by the Assembly of States Parties. According to reports, 82 member states supported his removal, surpassing the required absolute majority. The court’s oversight body concluded that Khan had engaged in misconduct, though the specifics of the findings remain unclear. The case reportedly involves allegations of nonconsensual sexual conduct with a female aide, whom Khan has not named publicly. The woman, identified as Sarah, spoke out in a CNN interview, emphasizing the lack of consent due to the power dynamic in their relationship. Khan’s legal team has strongly opposed the decision, arguing that the process violated due process and was not supported by credible evidence. Tayab Ali, a partner at Bindmans LLP and head of Khan’s legal team, stated that the Assembly of States Parties ignored concerns raised by over 180 nongovernmental organizations and senior international lawyers. He emphasized that Khan had consistently denied the allegations and that the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) did not find any evidence of misconduct in its report. Ali noted that a three-judge panel had unanimously reviewed the case and found no substantiated claims of misconduct, including sexual misconduct, against Khan. The legal team has indicated they will challenge the decision, asserting that it lacks a proper legal basis. The ICC, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, was established under the Rome Statute to prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression when national courts fail to act. Khan’s tenure as chief prosecutor brought both acclaim and controversy, particularly for his pursuit of high-profile cases involving global leaders. His removal raises questions about the court’s internal governance and its ability to maintain credibility amid complex political dynamics. The situation has also drawn attention from the U.S., where Secretary of State Marco Rubio has actively campaigned to “dismantle” the ICC, accusing it of undermining American sovereignty. The timing of Khan’s ouster coincides with this broader geopolitical context, adding layers of complexity to the court’s current challenges. The ICC faces mounting pressure to address internal issues while maintaining its role in international justice. With Khan’s departure, the court must now navigate the transition of leadership and ensure continuity in its investigations. The allegations against Khan, whether proven or not, have placed the ICC in a precarious position, requiring careful handling to preserve its reputation and effectiveness. The court’s next steps will likely include appointing a new chief prosecutor and addressing the procedural controversies that surrounded Khan’s removal.