In a move that adds to a growing wave of withdrawals from the International Criminal Court (ICC), the central African nation of Chad announced Monday it would exit the Hague-based tribunal, citing longstanding criticisms of the court’s uneven effectiveness and its disproportionate focus on African nations.
Chad becomes the fifth country in recent months to launch withdrawal procedures, following Venezuela, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger — all of which have raised similar objections to the ICC’s mandate and operations. The announcement comes just days after ICC member states voted to remove chief prosecutor Karim Khan over unproven sexual assault allegations that Khan, 56, has categorically denied. His legal team has already announced plans to challenge the dismissal, questioning both the legality and fairness of the decision reached by member states.
In an official statement released by the government, Chadian officials confirmed the exit decision followed a comprehensive review of the ICC’s performance since the court first began operations in 2002. The review, the statement said, confirmed longstanding concerns that the tribunal’s impact has remained limited and inconsistent across global regions.
A core point of criticism from Chad is the ICC’s disproportionate focus on African states. Since the court entered into force, 9 of its 13 active investigations target African nations, while only four probes have been opened in other regions — none of which have yielded meaningful progress, according to the Chadian government. To date, the court holds just seven individuals in custody, six of whom are linked to African conflict situations, the statement added.
The timeline of the decision has sparked controversy over external influence: last week, an initial posting on the Chadian foreign minister’s official website claimed the withdrawal came in response to a request from the United States. The statement noted that U.S. Deputy Secretary of State for African Affairs had pressed Chadian officials to re-evaluate their ICC membership during a Thursday telephone call with Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Sabre Fadoul, adding that U.S. officials had raised their own concerns about the court’s functionality and urged Chad to reconsider its ratification of the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. However, Fadoul pushed back on that narrative Friday, telling AFP that “it was not at the Americans’ request that we decided to withdraw from the ICC.”
Chad’s exit announcement also arrives amid heightened international scrutiny of the country’s role in the ongoing civil conflict in neighboring Sudan. The Sudanese army and multiple international non-governmental organizations have accused Chadian authorities of allowing the United Arab Emirates to ship weapons through Chadian territory to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the paramilitary group fighting Sudan’s sitting government.
Legal advocates warn that the withdrawal will complicate ongoing efforts to hold actors accountable for potential war crimes in the region. French lawyer Vincent Brengarth, who submitted a formal report on the alleged weapons transfers to the ICC on behalf of NGOs, said Chad’s exit undermines the chances of the accountability initiative succeeding. “Beyond this case, this withdrawal weakens the international architecture of criminal justice and heightens fears that the perpetrators of the most serious crimes will escape any prosecution,” Brengarth said.
Chad’s decision fits into a rapidly growing trend of rejection of the ICC among nations across Africa and Latin America. Last Friday, Venezuela formally confirmed its own withdrawal, also citing claims of institutional bias. Venezuela’s exit comes as the ICC conducts an active investigation into alleged crimes against humanity committed under the government of President Nicolás Maduro. Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger — all Sahel nations currently led by military governments — have previously denounced the ICC as an “instrument of neocolonial repression in the hands of imperialism.”
Earlier this month, the ICC’s executive leadership issued a formal statement expressing deep concern over the withdrawal of the three West African nations, noting that repeated exits undermine the global effort to deliver justice for mass atrocities. The growing number of departures has sparked new debate over the court’s legitimacy and its ability to fairly prosecute grave crimes across all regions of the world.