During his regular media briefing, UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric was asked if the Secretary-General had anything to say regarding reports that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio wants to “dismantle” the Court, which prosecutes individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.
“While the ICC is an organization that is separate from the Secretariat and the UN, it remains for us a critical cog in the international justice system,” said Mr. Dujarric.
“It is supported by a vast number of Member States, and it helps bring accountability for serious crimes,” he added.
The US is not a party to the Rome Statue, the 1998 treaty that established the ICC, which is located in The Hague in the Netherlands.
Learn more about the ICC in our explainer here.
Mr. Rubio laid out his plans in an opinion piece published in The Wall Street Journal, underlining sovereignty and independence.
“America never agreed to a world tribunal that can override our own courts and the Constitution,” he wrote.
The US was “launching a diplomatic campaign with a simple message – sovereign States over globalism,” Secretary Rubio continued.
It comes in the wake of developments last year, when Washington imposed sanctions on nine ICC personnel, including judges, the prosecutor and deputy prosecutors, in connection with efforts to investigate alleged war crimes committed by US forces in Afghanistan and Israel in Gaza.
International law ‘under attack’
In the opinion piece, Mr. Rubio stressed that “independence is our birthright” and the US does not “intend to trade it for rule by a self-appointed priesthood of ‘international law.’”
Mr. Dujarric was asked if the Secretary-General accepts this characterization of the system the UN Charter is built on.
“International law, the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were created by sovereign Member States,” he said.
“They have brought protection, they have brought relief to millions of people, and they are, as the Secretary-General has often said, under threat and under attack.”
