Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger withdraw from the International Criminal Court
Military leaders from Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger stand united in their decision to leave the ICC Source: Al Jazeera.
Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger recently announced to the global community that they plan on immediately withdrawing from the International Criminal Court (ICC). These three military-led countries stated they felt the ICC was an "instrument of neo-colonialist repression.” The ICC has not yet issued an official response, and although these three countries stressed their urgent need to withdraw, the process will take up to a year before it is fully effective.
Their statement also argued that the ICC “has proven itself incapable of handling and prosecuting proven war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of genocide, and crimes of aggression.” They also explained that they felt the ICC had a strong anti-African bias, a sentiment that has been shared by other global leaders. Of the thirty-three cases brought by the ICC against individuals, all but one targeted an African. The one non-African was Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, who was charged with crimes against humanity.
Much speculation surrounds why these countries chose to withdraw, but Russian influence plays a central role. Moscow provides them with both military and financial support, strengthening their ties. Since the ICC issued a warrant for Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Russia’s allies have sought to push back against the court. These nations’ alignment with Russia marks a decisive shift away from their former colonial ties with France.
These three countries form the Confederation of Sahel States and are each ruled by military juntas. One likely motivation for their withdrawal is that the violent coups that brought these regimes to power could be classified by the ICC as serious crimes, and are therefore making an effort to leave before they face any official charges. Their decision to leave also follows their recent withdrawal from the Economic Community of West African States and other regional blocs, further signaling their break from regional and international institutions.
This is not the first time a country has announced its withdrawal from the ICC. In April 2025, Hungary formally exited the court, citing what it described as the ICC’s unfair treatment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has faced repeated war crime charges. As a close ally of Israel, Hungary’s decision was widely seen as an effort to demonstrate solidarity and secure continued Israeli support.
The ICC has faced significant criticism, particularly from United States President Donald Trump. As a staunch ally of Israel, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on the court and its panel of judges in response to the charges brought against Netanyahu. Although the U.S. is not a member of the ICC, these sanctions have lasting consequences, straining America’s relations with the international community and undermining its global standing.
If the ICC continues to lose influence on the international stage, its ability to hold countries and their leaders accountable for crimes against humanity will weaken. As the world’s only independent international criminal court, its decline risks allowing serious crimes to go unpunished, particularly if global superpowers also choose to withdraw. While the withdrawal of just three countries may appear minor, the repercussions could be significant for both the international community and the African continent.
The ICC is once again in the global spotlight, and the decision by Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to withdraw raises doubts about its influence. Their move shows the growing divide between the court and countries that reject its authority. How these governments handle accusations of crimes against civilians and how they engage with the rest of the world will reveal a lot about the ICC’s future and its role on the global stage.