ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan Removed Over Sexual Misconduct as Court Faces Existential Pressure

The International Criminal Court has voted overwhelmingly to remove Karim Khan as chief prosecutor, marking a significant institutional crisis for the global war-crimes tribunal. The ICC's governing body passed the dismissal with 82 votes in favour, concluding a months-long investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct and abuse of authority that has shaken confidence in the world's only permanent international criminal court.

Khan, elected as the ICC's third prosecutor in 2021, was suspended last month following a comprehensive inquiry conducted by the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services. The investigation, which ran from November 2024 to December 2025, examined allegations that Khan engaged in an improper sexual relationship with a junior staff member and subsequently sought to obstruct her complaint against him. The inquiry generated over 5,000 pages of evidence and testimony before being reviewed by a judicial panel tasked with determining the severity of the misconduct.

The court's oversight body found in June that Khan had committed a "serious breach of duty and serious misconduct" through his conduct. Khan has consistently denied all allegations, with his legal team characterising his suspension as "unlawful, procedurally unfair and unsupported by evidence." Despite his denials, the voting outcome suggests the institution has concluded the evidence warranted his removal from office.

The Geopolitical Storm Surrounding the ICC

Khan's removal occurs amid an unprecedented assault on the ICC's legitimacy and authority. The prosecutor's downfall coincides with his pursuit of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged crimes connected to the Gaza conflict. This move triggered American sanctions against Khan and has intensified broader US hostility towards the institution.

The United States has now launched what it describes as a "whole-of-government" campaign to dismantle the ICC "brick by brick," citing alleged threats to American sovereignty. The campaign includes threats of visa bans, asset freezes, and diplomatic pressure on allied nations to withdraw from the court or reject its jurisdiction. This represents a dramatic escalation from Washington, which has historically maintained a complicated relationship with the ICC.

Notably, the United States, Russia, and Israel are not ICC members, though the court retains jurisdiction over crimes committed by their nationals on the territory of member states—a provision that has increasingly drawn criticism from these nations.

Why It Matters for Ghana

As a founding ICC member state and vocal supporter of international justice mechanisms, Ghana has a direct stake in the court's institutional health and legitimacy. The ICC represents Africa's primary avenue for pursuing accountability for international crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. A weakened ICC undermines the continent's capacity to seek justice for victims of mass atrocities and holds powerful actors accountable.

Ghana has consistently backed the ICC's work, particularly in investigating conflicts and atrocities across the African continent. The current crisis threatens to diminish the court's investigative capacity and political influence precisely when global geopolitical tensions are fracturing international institutions. The combination of internal misconduct scandals and external political pressure from major powers risks rendering the ICC unable to function effectively as a guarantor of international law.

For African nations like Ghana, the stakes are significant. A compromised ICC could signal that international justice mechanisms are vulnerable to political manipulation, potentially emboldening actors who commit atrocities in Africa and weakening deterrence against future crimes. Ghana and other African states must consider how they will support the institution's reforms whilst maintaining their commitment to accountability and the rule of law.