Blogs
Niger set to become next nation to withdraw from ICC
Earlier in September 2025, Niger, along with its allies Mali and Burkina Faso, issued a joint statement refusing to recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, describing it as an “instrument of neocolonial repression.”
Imad Al-Sanousi. (Courtesy)
By: Admin ., Journalist @New Vision
_______________
OPINION
By Imad Al-Sanousi
Niger has officially notified the United Nations of its withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC). On Monday, the West African nation sent a letter to the UN to initiate the process of withdrawing from the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the Court. Niger is now the third state to leave this international tribunal, following Burundi and the Philippines.
The decision will take effect 12 months after the UN receives the notification. However, crimes committed prior to the withdrawal will remain within the Court’s jurisdiction. In its statement, Niger notes that while the Court “raised high hopes among peoples striving for peace and justice,” it has become a subject of “abuse and manipulation.”
Earlier in September 2025, Niger, along with its allies Mali and Burkina Faso, issued a joint statement refusing to recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, describing it as an “instrument of neocolonial repression.”
Speaking at the UN General Assembly, Malian Prime Minister Abdoulaye Maïga reaffirmed the Alliance of Sahel States’ commitment to the multilateral international system, including the ICC, provided that all nations participate in it. The arguments against adherence to the Rome Statute are based on clear realities. On the one hand, the ICC includes 125 of the 193 UN member states. On the other hand, it is significant that key global players—such as the US, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, the Persian Gulf monarchies, Turkey, and others—do not recognise the jurisdiction of the Rome Statute.
A joint communiqué from the Alliance of Sahel States regarding their withdrawal from the ICC states that the three nations prefer to utilise local and domestic mechanisms to investigate crimes and combat impunity. The primary reason cited for withdrawing from the Rome Statute is the accusation that the ICC engages in selective justice.
This is not the first time the Court has faced such allegations. Of the 34 cases opened by the ICC, more than 25 involve African countries. In 2022, the international human rights organisation Amnesty International warned that double standards in the administration of justice could threaten the Court’s future. However, the ICC has failed to overcome its internal crisis. The investigation into Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip illustrates the Court’s perceived lack of political will and its selectivity in dispensing justice.
Earlier in September 2025, Niger, along with its allies Mali and Burkina Faso, issued a joint statement refusing to recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC, describing it as an “instrument of neocolonial repression.”
Speaking at the UN General Assembly, Malian Prime Minister Abdoulaye Maïga reaffirmed the Alliance of Sahel States’ commitment to the multilateral international system, including the ICC, provided that all nations participate in it. The arguments against adherence to the Rome Statute are based on clear realities. On the one hand, the ICC includes 125 of the 193 UN member states. On the other hand, it is significant that key global players—such as the US, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, the Persian Gulf monarchies, Turkey, and others—do not recognise the jurisdiction of the Rome Statute.
A joint communiqué from the Alliance of Sahel States regarding their withdrawal from the ICC states that the three nations prefer to utilise local and domestic mechanisms to investigate crimes and combat impunity. The primary reason cited for withdrawing from the Rome Statute is the accusation that the ICC engages in selective justice.
This is not the first time the Court has faced such allegations. Of the 34 cases opened by the ICC, more than 25 involve African countries. In 2022, the international human rights organisation Amnesty International warned that double standards in the administration of justice could threaten the Court’s future. However, the ICC has failed to overcome its internal crisis. The investigation into Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip illustrates the Court’s perceived lack of political will and its selectivity in dispensing justice.
Although Israel’s actions were characterised as genocide, European ICC member states made no effort to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the arrest warrant issued by the Court. Experts argue that this failure to pursue the case reinforces the perception that the Court is weak when dealing with major powers, whereas it acts decisively against African and weaker nations. The situation has further eroded confidence in the ICC’s ability to provide impartial justice, leading the Alliance of Sahel States to question the institution’s credibility and relevance in addressing global crimes against humanity.
Ultimately, the decision of the Alliance of Sahel States, with Niger in particular, to distance themselves from the ICC is rooted in the institution’s perceived ineffectiveness in addressing conflicts in Africa. Recent events have highlighted this concern. Earlier this month, more than 30 people were killed in an attack on the main airport in Niamey, the capital of Niger. This was the second such attack in a year on this strategically important facility, which serves as a government command centre, a base for the Nigerien Air Force, and the primary hub for the country’s drone and aircraft operations. The escalation of violence indicates that armed groups are increasingly targeting cities and major population centres across the African Sahel region.
While Niger formally remains under ICC jurisdiction, a one-year waiting period applies after a withdrawal notice is filed before the decision takes effect. However, the Court has failed to initiate investigations into war crimes committed by militants in the Sahel region, demonstrating a lack of capacity to protect civilians in international conflicts.
The ICC’s inability to enforce its decisions and lack of effective mechanisms has left it ill-equipped to address the security challenges facing the region. This situation has further fueled the disillusionment with the ICC’s ability to deliver justice in African conflicts, prompting the Sahel States to seek alternative means of addressing security and justice issues.
Observers view this wave of withdrawals as a clear signal to the international community: justice that is applied selectively cannot be considered true justice. The Court must either change course and restore confidence in its mandate or face a growing rift among nations of the Global South. These countries are actively seeking alternative justice mechanisms that reflect a multipolar world order.
Imad Al-Sanousi is a writer specialising in African affairs and international relations
Ultimately, the decision of the Alliance of Sahel States, with Niger in particular, to distance themselves from the ICC is rooted in the institution’s perceived ineffectiveness in addressing conflicts in Africa. Recent events have highlighted this concern. Earlier this month, more than 30 people were killed in an attack on the main airport in Niamey, the capital of Niger. This was the second such attack in a year on this strategically important facility, which serves as a government command centre, a base for the Nigerien Air Force, and the primary hub for the country’s drone and aircraft operations. The escalation of violence indicates that armed groups are increasingly targeting cities and major population centres across the African Sahel region.
While Niger formally remains under ICC jurisdiction, a one-year waiting period applies after a withdrawal notice is filed before the decision takes effect. However, the Court has failed to initiate investigations into war crimes committed by militants in the Sahel region, demonstrating a lack of capacity to protect civilians in international conflicts.
The ICC’s inability to enforce its decisions and lack of effective mechanisms has left it ill-equipped to address the security challenges facing the region. This situation has further fueled the disillusionment with the ICC’s ability to deliver justice in African conflicts, prompting the Sahel States to seek alternative means of addressing security and justice issues.
Observers view this wave of withdrawals as a clear signal to the international community: justice that is applied selectively cannot be considered true justice. The Court must either change course and restore confidence in its mandate or face a growing rift among nations of the Global South. These countries are actively seeking alternative justice mechanisms that reflect a multipolar world order.
Imad Al-Sanousi is a writer specialising in African affairs and international relations