The International Criminal Court: Preparing for Challenges and Not Giving Up 

The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces mounting challenges amid an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape. Yet, according to Päivi Kaukoranta, the President of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) of the Court, it remains steadfast in its mission:

“The ICC is preparing for all challenges coming and is not giving up.”

President Päivi Kaukoranta

Päivi Kaukoranta was elected to a three-year term in December 2023 as President of the ASP to the Rome Statute after a distinguished career in law and diplomacy. The ASP is the Court’s management oversight and legislative body and is composed of representatives of the States which have ratified or acceded to the Rome Statute.

Her journey began at the University of Helsinki, where she studied law before joining the Finnish Foreign Service as a legal expert. Her career saw her contribute to Finland’s early engagement with the ICC negotiations in the mid-1990s as part of the Finnish delegation to the Ad hoc Committee and to the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court in 1995-1998.

Amongst many, she has served as Director of Legal Affairs and later as Ambassador of Finland to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, where she deepened her involvement with the ICC and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and other international organisations. Upon her return to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, she leads the National Security Authority.

“Somehow people began to ask me whether I would be interested in running for the President of the Assembly,” she recalled. “It was not an immediate yes. I considered it for several months.”

Her work as ASP President is demanding and global. Based in Helsinki, she travels frequently to The Hague, New York, Brussels, and other capitals to represent the Assembly and engage with States Parties and a wide range of stakeholders. She carries out her presidential responsibilities on a voluntary basis and without remuneration. While fully committed and actively engaged in each of her presidential duties, she is in parallel serving as Director of the National Security Authority (NSA) of Finland.

The International Criminal Court

The ICC is the world’s first permanent court to investigate and prosecute individuals for the gravest crimes under international law. Currently, 125 are States Parties, and there are 61 active arrest warrants.

Jurisdiction

The Court exercises jurisdiction when crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes have been committed after 1 July 2002; by a national of a State Party, in the territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the Court’s jurisdiction.

The ICC also covers crimes of aggression.

The Court seeks to hold perpetrators accountable and help prevent future atrocities, working to complement, not replace national judicial systems.

The ICC is permanently based in The Hague, The Netherlands.

Sanctions and Political Pressure

The ICC currently faces intense political pressure, including two rounds of U.S. sanctions imposed since June 2025. These measures, targeting judges and prosecutors over investigations into alleged Israeli war crimes and past cases in Afghanistan, have been strongly condemned by both the Court, the Presidency of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, and the United Nations.

There is a looming threat of further extensions of U.S. sanctions to the entire institution, which would have far-reaching implications for the Court’s daily operations.

President Kaukoranta highlighted that sanctions affect not only the individuals targeted and their families, but also the Court’s broader ability to function:

“They may disrupt ICC field offices — including in Ukraine, for example — cut off outreach to affected communities, undermine victim and witness protection, discourage testimony, and jeopardize fair trial,” she explained. “They could block the Trust Fund for Victims from delivering reparations to survivors, threaten operations by restricting banking and financial services, and interrupt commercial IT and other essential services. These are very practical challenges the Court is facing and will face if there is an extension of sanctions.”

Other Challenges: Non-Cooperations and Withdrawals

Beyond U.S. actions, she reminded that other actors have also targeted the Court, including Russian arrest warrants against ICC judges. Meanwhile, Hungary and several African states have announced their intention to withdraw from the Rome Statute. The ICC has faced issues on non-cooperation, raising concerns about maintaining the Court’s critical mass of support.

A notable example is Hungary. Despite an active ICC arrest warrant issued in November 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Hungary hosted him from 2 to 6 April 2025 at the invitation of its Prime Minister. As a State Party to the Rome Statute, Hungary has a legal obligation to arrest individuals subject to ICC warrants. However, on 3 April 2025, Hungary announced its intention to withdraw from the Court. This withdrawal will take effect on 2 June 2026, meaning Hungary remains bound by its international obligations until that date.

President Kaukoranta acknowledged that the Rome Statute has limited enforcement mechanisms in cases of non-cooperation. However, she emphasised that there are clear procedures in place to address such situations if a country does not follow their obligations.

“Every time there’s non-cooperation or withdrawal, the Assembly reacts,” she explained. “We send letters, follow procedures under the Rome Statute, and bring cases to the Assembly for discussion.”

She underscored that one of the ICC’s greatest long-term challenges is maintaining the support of its States Parties. As an international court, the ICC relies heavily on state cooperation to carry out investigations, enforce arrest warrants and sentences, and protect victims and witnesses.

“It does not have all the necessary means to do the implementation on its own, enforce its sentences, protect victims, witnesses, and so on,” she said. “The challenge is to ensure that States Parties continue to support the Court in the future.”

Regarding withdrawals, she expressed hope that Hungary’s decision would not set a precedent for others as the court needs the support of the States Parties more than ever. Yet she reminds that “Of course, all States Parties and states are sovereign actors, and you cannot force them to be with the court, so we would hope to convince there is value and something that is in their interest to be part of that cooperation.”

Pillars of the ICC’s Future

President Kaukoranta views young people and civil society as vital pillars for the future of international justice.

“When I graduated, the world was less international,” she recalled. “Today’s youth are more open, educated, and much more prepared to do the work than we were at the time. I encourage them to study abroad, interact with different nationalities and cultures, and apply for internships — including at the ICC. New blood and enthusiasm are always needed.”

Civil society, she noted, played a crucial role in the Court’s establishment and continues to be central to its functioning:

“Civil society was very instrumental in the negotiation, almost to the extent that if there were no such support and pressure from civil society, I wonder whether the negotiations would have led to the establishment of the ICC.” she said. “They continue to support it [ICC], but of course, their work is being made more difficult when cooperation with the court is seen as something suspect. It is important that we continue.”

Looking to the future, President Kaukoranta stressed the importance of maintaining States Parties’ support, adapt to changes, and continue to deliver justice through investigations and reparations.

“The ICC is still a young institution,” she reflected. “It has produced serious work and case law, and it will build upon that. The main thing is that it meets expectations — that it deals with cases, delivers sentences and reparations for victims, and does justice for them.”

When asked where she envisions the ICC in 10 years’ time and what she would like the institution to have achieved by then, President Kaukoranta responded with determination and optimism.

“Doing the everyday, normal work of investigating and producing results,” she said. “Of course, as we discussed today, there are serious challenges, and I trust and believe they will be overcome. The Court is not giving up — it is determined to maintain business continuity in the face of difficulties. The right spirit is there. I believe that in 10 years, the Court will be as strong as ever and will continue to meet the expectations we place upon it.”

She also highlighted the need for the Court to keep pace with rapid developments.

“If criminals are using all the new possibilities, of course, the Court will need to develop and keep up,” she said.

The Court and the UN

While not a UN body, the ICC has a cooperation agreement with the United Nations. The UN Security Council can refer situations to the Court under Chapter VII of the Charter, as seen in Darfur and Libya.

In the case of Palestine, the Court’s jurisdiction is grounded in Palestine’s 2015 declaration and its subsequent accession to the Statute following its recognition as a non-member observer State by the UN General Assembly in 2012. This has enabled the ICC to examine alleged war crimes committed in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Gaza, and to issue arrest warrants concerning both Israeli and Palestinian leaders.

Conclusion

Despite sanctions, withdrawals, and political headwinds, President Kaukoranta remains confident:

“The ICC is preparing for all challenges coming and is not giving up. It is a vital building block of the rules-based international order. If it didn’t exist, it would have to be created.”

With 125 States Parties, 61 arrest warrants—including for heads of state—and an expanding caseload, the Court continues to pursue justice for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression. Its success depends on the collective will of states, civil society, and individuals committed to international justice.

Key Takeaways:

• The ICC faces unprecedented political pressures and sanctions, including multiple rounds of U.S. measures targeting judges and prosecutors.

• Maintaining State Party support is essential for the Court’s effectiveness, as it relies on cooperation for arrests, enforcement, and resources.

• Civil society, young people, and international cooperation remain vital to sustaining the ICC’s work and legitimacy.
• Despite withdrawals and non-cooperation from some states, the Court is determined to continue its mandate.