US Sanctions Force ICC Assembly Move to The Hague

The International Criminal Court is taking its biggest annual meeting out of New York. The ICC assembly move — relocating the court’s twenty-fifth session of the Assembly of States Parties from United Nations headquarters to The Hague, running from 30 November to 7 December 2026 — was decided on 28 September 2026, after American sanctions made it impossible for some of the court’s own officials to travel to United States soil, according to the court’s official announcement. It is the clearest sign yet that Washington’s pressure campaign is changing how the world’s permanent war-crimes tribunal actually operates.

The pressure has been building for nearly two years. In February 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order targeting officials of the Hague-based court; since then Washington has blacklisted nine judges, two deputy prosecutors, the court’s suspended chief prosecutor Karim Khan and one staff member, freezing any assets under American jurisdiction and barring their travel to the country. In August 2025, court president Tomoko Akane and senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye joined the list, and — as GenZ NewZ reported last month — the Wall Street Journal revealed plans for sanctions against the institution as a whole, a step that would bar most transactions with the tribunal after a grace period of six to seven months.

The court’s announcement, made after consultations with every member state, cited “limitations on participation arising from the venue of the session”: elected officials under American sanctions could not attend in New York, and some delegations plus civil-society groups faced visa restrictions. Assembly president Päivi Kaukoranta stressed that the decision answers the specific circumstances of 2026 and sets no precedent for future venues — a signal the court still hopes to return across the Atlantic. The official documentation of the court’s announcement also confirms weekend working days, underscoring how compressed the diplomatic calendar has become.

Why the ICC assembly move became unavoidable

The mechanics of the sanctions explain the ICC assembly move. American measures do not only freeze assets and block travel; they cut sanctioned people off from dealings with US citizens and much of the global financial system, and they frighten banks, insurers and software providers into over-compliance. French judge Nicolas Guillou told European lawmakers that the penalties have followed him home: he described being unable to make ordinary payments inside Europe because financial firms fear secondary American measures. When judges cannot bank normally in their own countries, holding a major diplomatic session on American soil becomes unworkable.

There is also a staffing dimension. Deputy prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan told the Financial Times in late September that the tribunal had spent the past year insulating itself — shifting office software to a German open-source system, arranging workarounds for health insurance and banking, and paying employees months in advance to guard against payroll disruption. The court, in other words, is already operating as though broader sanctions could land at any moment.

Europe debates a legal shield after the ICC assembly move

Brussels is now openly discussing how to protect the court. At a 29 September 2026 briefing, the European Commission confirmed it is talking with member states about extending the EU’s Blocking Statute to cover the American sanctions on the court — while stressing that diplomacy remains its first option. The statute, adopted in 1996 against the extraterritorial effects of American measures on Cuba, Iran and Libya, shields European firms engaged in lawful activity from foreign laws the bloc does not recognise; applying it to the sanctions on the court would require a specific new legal act.

According to reporting on the Commission’s briefing, there is no timetable and no decision yet — but the fact that the decades-old instrument is even on the table shows how seriously Europe takes the threat.

Washington sees it very differently. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called the court “corrupt and fatally politicised”, according to reporting on his statements, and in July he announced what he termed a sweeping campaign to dismantle the threat the tribunal poses to American sovereignty — including pressuring member states to quit. Five countries have announced withdrawals from the court’s founding treaty in the past year — Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Venezuela and Chad — with the two most recent departures citing a geographic bias against the Global South, the Associated Press reported. The US itself never joined the court, so from Washington’s perspective the relocation looks less like a crisis than overdue pushback.

• Early 2025 — Trump signs the executive order authorising sanctions on court officials.
• Mid-2025 — Akane and Seye are added to the American sanctions list.
• 20 September 2026 — the Journal reports planned sanctions against the institution as a whole.
• 25 September 2026 — deputy prosecutor Khan tells the FT the court is buffering itself; at a UN event, South Africa’s foreign minister Ronald Lamola warns institution-wide sanctions could cripple the tribunal, while Dutch prime minister Rob Jetten insists international law must apply universally.
• Late September 2026 — the Bureau relocates the session to The Hague, and the Commission confirms it is discussing a legal shield with member states.

Why it matters beyond The Hague

For anyone who cares about accountability for atrocities, the ICC assembly move is not abstract. The tribunal is in the middle of live cases — including proceedings against former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte over his anti-drug campaign, which the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers says will reach the trial stage by the end of November 2026 and “will not immediately close” under sanctions pressure, according to the lawyers’ group. Courts need banks, software licences, insurance and staff who can be paid; when sanctions reach the institution rather than just individuals, every one of those becomes a pressure point. More human-rights coverage on GenZ NewZ follows how international courts are holding up under political fire.

The December session will now unfold in the city that hosts the court, with weekend working days and a packed agenda: electing officials, approving budgets and debating reforms while the sanctions cloud hangs over everything. Whether Europe’s shield law materialises — and whether Washington follows through on institution-wide measures — will decide whether the ICC assembly move was a one-off detour or the new normal for international justice.