AES: When the ICC expresses concern over the withdrawal of the three countries, but never over its own bias

The International Criminal Court is concerned. In a statement issued Wednesday, the Presidency of the Assembly of States Parties urged Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to abandon their withdrawal from the Rome Statute, warning that a “collective quest for justice” would be compromised. One year after Niger formalized its withdrawal procedure set to take effect on June 18, 2027 the Court has suddenly discovered the virtues of dialogue. A strange awakening, given the deafening silence of this institution in the face of other crimes committed by other hands.

Let us be clear: the ICC has never been the universal and impartial jurisdiction it claims to be.

Since its creation, it has been a one-way instrument, aimed almost exclusively at African leaders, while Western heads of state responsible for wars of aggression, bombing civilian populations, and deadly interference across multiple continents continue to move freely, honored in capitals around the world.

Where are the arrest warrants for those who ravaged Iraq, Libya, and so many other nations under false pretenses? The Court’s silence on these matters is telling.

Worse still, this selective justice extends to some African leaders themselves those who have remained in the good graces of Western powers.

As long as a head of state serves the interests of Paris, Washington, or Brussels, he enjoys de facto immunity, regardless of his actions.

But let an African leader dare to assert his sovereignty, reject neocolonial tutelage, and suddenly the same Court becomes vigilant once again.

Under these conditions, how can we expect the new African leaders those who come to power carried by a popular aspiration for rupture to remain members of an organization that treats them as perpetual defendants?

The ICC cannot claim to defend the fight against impunity while itself practicing a geographically variable impunity. This is not justice; it is instrumentalization.

Rather than multiplying appeals for dialogue and diplomatic regrets, the ICC would do well to engage in genuine introspection.

Let it examine its own governance, the composition of its judges, the selection of its cases, and the origin of its funding.

Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger are not abandoning international justice; they are abandoning a charade.

And as long as the Court refuses to question itself, other African nations will follow this path.

Olivier TOE