Member state representatives of the International Criminal Court voted on Friday to remove the global tribunal’s chief prosecutor, nearly two years after sexual misconduct allegations against him first surfaced, according to confirmation from two diplomats to The Associated Press.
British barrister Karim Khan has faced accusations of sexual misconduct with a female aide, as detailed by the AP in previous reports; Khan has consistently denied these allegations.
The ICC's 125 member states ousted Khan from his position by a large majority, marking the first time a chief prosecutor has been removed from office.
Khan, who is 56 years old, was temporarily relieved of his duties at the ICC in June ahead of Friday’s vote after a report from the executive committee of the court's oversight body concluded he committed "serious misconduct." Documents reviewed by the AP indicate that Khan engaged in a sexual relationship with the woman and attempted to prevent her from pursuing her claims. Khan disputes these findings.
Early in the session, a motion put forward by Sierra Leone aimed at making it more difficult to remove Khan failed, prompting diplomats to move forward with the removal vote several hours ahead of schedule, according to three diplomatic sources familiar with the proceedings.
Countries cast their votes via secret ballot. The Netherlands, the court's host state, voted for his removal, as did France and Norway, which publicly announced their decisions before the meeting.
Norway’s deputy foreign minister, Andreas Motzfeldt Kravik, stated in a statement to the AP, “We believe it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that his conduct constituted sexual harassment and abuse of power.”
Dutch Foreign Minister Tom Berendsen indicated in a letter to Parliament last week that there was sufficient support for Khan's removal. He noted, “Although the balance of power within the ASP is still evolving, the position of most contracting parties also appears to be in line with the recommendation of the ASP Office.”
Päivi Kaukoranta, president of the Assembly of State Parties, mentioned at the public opening of the meeting that the vote would occur privately "to address a complex and sensitive disciplinary matter as part of this governance and oversight role of the International Criminal Court."
This lengthy and intricate process has created divisions among human rights advocates, staff, and member states while the court already confronts significant challenges, including a campaign by the United States to "dismantle" the ICC, which was established to prosecute individuals responsible for humanity’s worst crimes.
Lucy Gaynor, a historian of international criminal tribunals at the University of Amsterdam, told The Associated Press before the vote that "There has been splintering over how the court has handled this."
Groups supporting the court's work have held differing views. Last week, a coalition of Palestinian organizations released a public letter criticizing the executive committee for "unwarranted political interference" and arguing it lacks "the independence, impartiality or legal expertise to make assessments.”
In June, the International Federation for Human Rights, Redress and Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, along with others, asserted that the victim had been “publicly questioned, instrumentalized, and too readily dismissed as part of a political agenda.”
Staff members also expressed apprehension about the future. A group within the prosecutor’s office sent a letter to the oversight body expressing serious concerns regarding Khan's potential return, writing that his "leadership has been materially diminished."
The court faces more turbulent times ahead. The Trump administration, which has already sanctioned key ICC staff including Khan, seeks further to destabilize the 24-year-old tribunal it claims challenges US sovereignty.