Hungary’s ICC Exit Shows Court’s Justice Failure

 A senior research fellow at The Global Policy Institute, Dr. George Szamuely,has criticized the International Criminal Court (ICC), stating it lacks international legal standing and functions as a random assembly of countries aimed at targeting Western adversaries in a moralistic and legalistic manner.

His comments come in light of Hungary’s decision to withdraw from the organization.

Dr.Szamuely highlighted the ICC’s double standards, noting that it has never pursued the United States or other major powers for alleged crimes while predominantly focusing on African nations. “The only defendants who have been successfully prosecuted by the ICC have been Africans,” he remarked, pointing out the significant imbalance.

He also condemned the ICC’s involvement in political matters, referencing the 2011 case in Libya, where the court issued indictments against Muammar Gaddafi and his son without conducting a thorough investigation, effectively acting as “a propaganda arm for NATO.”

Also Read: ICC Future Looks Bleak, As Erosion of Trust Deepens  

The Senior Researcher .also criticized the ICC’s recent actions, such as issuing an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin without adequate evidence, which he believes further damages the court’s credibility. “The ICC readily aligns itself with the interests of NATO powers,” he concluded, revealing its politicized nature.

The International Criminal Court (ICC)was established in 2002 to address the grave crimes of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

It was envisioned as a beacon of hope for global justice, a court that would hold accountable those who commit atrocities when national courts fail to do so. However, the Court’s reliance on financial aid, particularly from the United States, has complicated its role and weakened its standing in the eyes of the world.

In February of this year, following the visit of the court’s Chief Prosecutor, Karim Khan, to the DRC, he indirectly acknowledged the court’s inability to address the ongoing atrocities in the Democratic Republic of Congo, suggesting that a special tribunal be established to handle the situation. This acknowledgment underscores the growing incompetence of the ICC and its failure to fulfill its mandate.

Also Read: ICC Acknowledges Limitations, Backs New Court Proposal 

On April 28, the ICC, seemingly embroiled in internal disputes, ordered its Chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, to refrain from making public announcements about the arrest warrants in the court’s Palestine case. This decision raises concerns about the court’s credibility, suggesting that all is not well in what was once regarded as a bastion of justice and fairness. The ICC’s inability to maintain transparency and coherence undermines its authority and reputation in the international community.

Clearly, a court  founded with a noble mission to be a beacon of justice on the global stage is gradually sinking deep because of rising distrust amongst many countries mainly due to its perceived unfairness in the justice system.

When an institution like the ICC relies heavily on funding from a single country, it risks being seen as beholden to that nation’s interests. Critics argue that this dependence has compromised the Court’s independence and impartiality, leading to questions about its legitimacy.