The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court was faraway from office on Friday, nearly two years after sexual misconduct allegations against him first emerged.
By a big majority, the ICC’s 125-member states ousted British barrister Karim Khan for “serious misconduct and serious breach of duty,” the court’s oversight body, the Assembly of States Parties, said in an announcement.
The lengthy and complex process has pitted human rights advocates, staff and member states against each other at a time when the court is already facing daunting challenges, including a campaign by the US to “dismantle” the ICC, which was established to prosecute people answerable for humanity’s worst crimes.
The oversight body will now must hold elections for a brand new prosecutor, someone who’s more likely to face sanctions by the Trump administration, which has already brought the force of monetary penalties and travel bans on 13 members of staff, including Khan.
“The ICC should hold itself to the very best standards. This includes ensuring a protected workplace with effective and credible mechanisms available to staff or others who experience abuse, including sexual violence or harassment,” Liz Evenson, international justice director at Human Rights Watch, said in an announcement to the AP.
The 56-year-old Khan was accused of sexual misconduct with a female aide, as outlined by The Associated Press in a series of stories, allegations he has steadfastly denied. Based on documents seen by the AP, Khan engaged in a sexual relationship with the lady and tried to forestall her from pursuing her allegations.
Khan’s lawyers criticized the method resulting in his ouster, complaining that he was blocked from addressing the session Friday and arguing the regulations had been rewritten to drawback him.
Get day by day National news
Get day by day Canada news delivered to your inbox so you will never miss the day’s top stories.
Khan’s “removal was determined by a process by which he was never given a good opportunity to be heard, and in defiance of the conclusions of the independent judges who examined the complete evidential record,” attorney Tayab Ali said in an announcement. He said Khan’s legal team would challenge the choice “through all available legal mechanisms.”
The choice comes at a time when the worldwide tribunal is under enormous pressure.
In an announcement last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. was launching a “sweeping campaign to dismantle the threat posed by the International Criminal Court to U.S. sovereignty.”
Rubio said he’ll pressure member states to withdraw from the institution, sanction organizations that work with the court and ban staff from traveling to the US. Countries that “enjoy the advantages of the U.S. security umbrella” will likely be called upon to reject the court’s jurisdiction over U.S. residents.
Hours after Friday’s vote, Venezuela announced it will withdraw from the court. “Venezuela considers that the Court’s actions reflect a demonstrated geographical bias, which has disproportionately concentrated its work on African and Latin American countries, to the detriment of the Global South,” Félix Plasencia, the country’s foreign affairs minister announced in an announcement.
Earlier this 12 months, prosecutors on the court announced they were dropping an investigation into whether U.S. sanctions against Venezuela qualified as crimes against humanity, citing an absence of evidence. A separate investigation into possible crimes committed by Venezuelan security forces under former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro will proceed.
Trump’s administration already has brought sanctions against Khan and a dozen other ICC staff in retaliation for warrants the court has issued for top Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, over the war in Gaza and investigations into U.S. personnel in Afghanistan.
The allegations against Khan have grow to be entwined with the court’s investigation into the war in Gaza, experts said.
“Political considerations have been folded into this, especially because it is the primary time a prosecutor has pursued warrants against a Western ally,” Iva Vukusic, a researcher at Utrecht University who has been following the method, told the AP.
Khan’s removal can have no immediate impact on the arrest warrants in 2024 for Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity, which might only be withdrawn by ICC judges.
Before ending the closed session, Kaukoranta called for the international community to respect “the dignity and privacy of all those involved” within the case regarding Khan.
“I expressed my deep appreciation to the assembly of states parties for the diligent consideration of this difficult matter, and for the spirit of unity shown in upholding the integrity of the court,” she said.
Quell reported from The Hague, Netherlands,. Amiri reported from Recent York.
© 2026 The Canadian Press