ICC states should respect judges' report on prosecutor, says Norway’s deputy foreign minister

ICC states should respect judges' report on prosecutor, says Norway’s deputy foreign minister Submitted by Sondos Asem on Sat, 06/06/2026 - 14:01 Andreas Kravik urges ICC members not to politicise consequential vote on Karim Khan’s fate Norwegian Deputy Foreign Minister Andreas Kravik poses for a photo at the foreign ministry in Oslo on 4 June 2026 (MEE/Hossam Sarhan) Off Norway’s deputy foreign minister, Andreas Kravik, has urged member states of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to avoid “a perception of politicisation of the process” as they vote on the fate of the court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan. Speaking exclusively to Middle East Eye ahead of Monday’s deadline for the bureau of the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties (ASP) to vote on Khan’s future, Kravik called on the court’s executive ruling body to “respect the procedures” it had put in place to examine misconduct allegations against the prosecutor. If the 21-member bureau recommends a finding that Khan is guilty of serious misconduct, the larger 125-member ASP will vote on the case, with a two-thirds majority required to uphold the decision. A second vote would then take place on whether to remove him. "What we have said is that the ICC needs to look at this case in conformity with the procedures that have been established for examining such allegations of misconduct,” Kravik told MEE on Thursday at the Norwegian foreign ministry in Oslo. Norway has been a member state of the ICC since the court was established by the Rome Statute in 2002, but it is not represented on the bureau. MEE reported in March that a panel of judges appointed by the bureau concluded that a United Nations investigation had not established any wrongdoing by Khan. But a few weeks later, a majority of bureau members backed a motion to disregard the judges' report, suggesting that Khan may have committed some form of misconduct.  'Politicisation' Legal experts have warned that the bureau's disregard for the judges' opinion risks politicising the misconduct probe.  “We think it's so important to respect the procedures that have been established,” said Kravik. “Because otherwise, there will be at least a perception of politicisation of the process. And that would hurt the integrity of the court,” he added. “That's something that we cannot afford, especially in this time when the court is under real pressure by other states and where certain states are trying, at the best of their ability, to portray the court as a politicised entity not operating in conformity with core principles of international law.” 'It's so important to respect the procedures that have been established... Because otherwise, there will be at least a perception of politicisation'  - Andreas Kravik, Norwegian deputy foreign minister Kravik said that Norway, as a non-member of the bureau, is not privy to the current deliberations and has not received the highly confidential reports by the UN and judges' panel. But based on credible briefings on the two reports, he believes that the judges' opinions should carry legal weight in the decision-making process of the bureau and the assembly. “We haven't seen the full reports. But we understand that there has been an investigation by the UN entity responsible for carrying out such investigations," the Norwegian diplomat said in a forthcoming episode of MEE's Expert Witness podcast. "The conclusions of that report have been transferred to a legal panel comprising three judges, and they have looked at it, and their conclusion is that there are no grounds for taking certain actions against the prosecutor, at least in terms of alleviating him from his responsibilities as prosecutor,” he added. “From my vantage point, without getting ahead of the curve, it seems that that is a sensible conclusion.  “But obviously, this is now before the bureau. We're not on the bureau. So we'll see what the bureau does. And eventually it might come before the Assembly of States parties. And then based on an assessment of the facts of the case, we'll make a determination. “For us, the most important thing here is that the procedures that have been established are respected and that all individuals, also the prosecutor, are entitled to the judicial safeguards enshrined in those judicial guarantees that are giving guidance to these processes.” US sanctions on ICC officials The misconduct probe has left the court in an unprecedented state of limbo amid uncertainty about Khan's future and media leaks about the allegations he faced.  Allegations of sexual misconduct, which Khan has strenuously denied, emerged in May 2024. The complainant refused to cooperate with the ICC’s own investigative body, prompting the ASP to commission an outsourced UN-led investigation. The findings of that investigation were then delivered to a panel of three judges, who were tasked with advising the bureau on whether Khan had committed serious misconduct, less serious misconduct or no misconduct at all. Andreas Kravik speaking at the Assembly of States Parties in The Hague, Netherlands, December 2025 (Norwegian embassy) In a report seen by MEE, the panel concluded unanimously that the facts presented in the UN investigation “do not establish misconduct or breach of duty under the relevant framework”. Khan told MEE in an interview last month that, if the ASP sought to remove him, he would appeal to the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization (ILOAT), the body to which ICC staff may appeal employment decisions. In a legal opinion shared with ICC member states last month, Abdul Koroma, a former International Court of Justice (ICJ) judge, said that the ICC could be ordered by the ILOAT to reinstate Khan and pay up to €1.5m ($1.74m) in compensation if the court's governing body removed or sanctioned him. The allegations against Khan have unfolded in parallel with a campaign by the US and its allies to disrupt his office's efforts to pursue a war crimes investigation into Israeli officials over the genocide in Gaza.  Khan, a British barrister, was elected in February 2021 by the ASP as the ICC’s chief prosecutor. His office has since investigated serious international crimes allegedly committed by state leaders from across the world, including seeking arrest warrants for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, Myanmar’s junta leaders and the Taliban in Afghanistan.  ICC could be ordered to reinstate prosecutor if it removes him, judge argues Read More » His work has prompted retaliatory US sanctions by the Trump administration in February 2024, as well as a trial in absentia and an arrest warrant issued by Russian courts. The US, Russia and Israel are not members of the court, but it has jurisdiction over crimes committed by their nationals on the territory of ICC member states. The sanctions were later expanded to target two deputy prosecutors and eight ICC judges involved in the Palestine and Afghanistan investigations, the UN special rapporteur on Palestine, as well as Palestinian NGOs that provided evidence to the court. In his interview with MEE, Kravik reiterated Norway's support for the court's sanctions and its commitment to enforcing arrest warrants for state leaders, including Netanyahu. “The fact that some third states who aren't party to the court have decided to sanction court officials for just doing their jobs is unconscionable,” he said. “We are in close discussions with our European partners, but also partners beyond Europe, about how we should oppose these actions taken primarily by the US. “As a state party, we are committed to doing everything we can to ensure that those who are working for the court can do so without being subjected to sanctions or any other measures that try to prevent them from carrying out their functions under the court's mandate.” International law Oslo News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0