The presidency of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) to the Rome Statute recently conveyed its apprehension regarding the declared intention of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC). Such a move, it believes, could significantly undermine global initiatives aimed at combating impunity for grave crimes.

In a formal statement, ASP President Päivi Kaukoranta expressed regret over this development. She emphasized that the departure of these three nations risks jeopardizing crucial international cooperation in the realm of criminal justice. Kaukoranta underscored the ICC’s vital role as a cornerstone of the international justice system, urging the trio of countries to maintain their status as parties to the Rome Statute and continue their engagement with the Assembly’s proceedings.

The presidency further highlighted that member states are equipped with established channels to voice their concerns within the Assembly, advocating for dialogue as the preferred approach. It also reiterated a critical point: a withdrawal from the Rome Statute does not absolve a state of its obligations incurred during the period it was a party to the treaty.

This pronouncement follows the official notification of Niger’s withdrawal. The ICC confirmed receiving this notification on June 18, 2026, which was transmitted to the United Nations Secretary-General, the designated depositary of the Rome Statute. In accordance with the provisions of the treaty, this withdrawal is slated to become effective on June 18, 2027.

Back in September 2025, the leaders of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), comprising Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, had initially announced their collective decision to exit the ICC. A joint communiqué, endorsed by the then-acting AES President, Malian transitional leader General Assimi Goïta, leveled accusations against the Court. They claimed it was ineffective in prosecuting perpetrators of the most severe crimes and condemned what they termed “selective justice.” The AES additionally asserted that the ICC has transformed into an “instrument of neocolonial repression,” criticizing its perceived silence on certain atrocities while, in their view, disproportionately targeting actors outside “the circle of beneficiaries of institutionalized international impunity.”