ICC judges sue Trump over sanctions, calling illegal measures | Story

Judges oppose sanctions aimed at punishing and enforcing ICC decisions on US-Israeli war crimes.

Three judges of the International Criminal Court are indicting the President of the United States Donald Trump and his officials for the punishments given to him last yearthey argue that these methods were illegal.

In the case handed down in Manhattan court on Wednesday, judges Kimberly Prost of Canada, Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda and Reine Adelaide Sophie Alapini-Gansou of Benin said the sentences were designed to coerce the jury.

The Trump administration imposed sanctions on a number of judges at the ICC last year in retaliation for an unprecedented decision by the court to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and an earlier decision to open a trial for war crimes committed by US troops in Afghanistan.

As a result of the sanctions, the judges saw their US goods and assets frozen. US corporations were also banned from engaging in commercial activities, including “providing money, goods or services”.

The ICC, which was established in 2002, has international jurisdiction to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes in member states or if a case is presented by the UN Security Council.

Although the ICC has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in 125 countries, some countries, including the US, China, Russia, and Israel, do not recognize its jurisdiction.

During Trump’s first term, his administration imposed sanctions on the ICC’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, and one of his assistants for the court’s work in Afghanistan.

The lawsuit says the sanctions were unconstitutional because they exceeded the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and were not based on an actual national crisis or extraordinary threat.

“The Sanctions Regime … is designed to put more pressure on these judges and their colleagues on the ICC bench by targeting their financial and other personal interests, with the aim of punishing them for pre-judicial decisions and forcing them to prioritize their private interests in deciding cases according to the law and principles,” the lawsuit said.

“Imposing such penalties under the IEEPA is tantamount to capital punishment.” As a result of the sanctions, Judges Prost, Bossa, and Alapini-Gansou are no longer able, among other things, to use credit cards; access to banking services; using popular online platforms, such as Amazon and Google; walking through books; and in some cases, getting health insurance,” it said.

The judges also said the sanctions bar them from testifying and arguing in any pending or future proceedings.