For the first time in the International Criminal Court's two-decade existence, a sitting chief prosecutor has been removed from office. On Friday, July 25, the ICC's Assembly of States Parties convened a special session at United Nations headquarters in New York and voted by secret ballot to dismiss Karim Khan, concluding that he had committed serious misconduct and a serious breach of duty against a subordinate staff member. The ouster, historic as it is, carries no consequence for the ongoing case against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.
Assembly Clears the Required Majority in New York Vote
Assembly President Päivi Kaukoranta announced the result: 82 of the court's 125 member states voted in favour of Khan's removal, surpassing the absolute majority threshold of 63 votes required under ICC rules. Thirteen member states voted against dismissal, 15 chose to abstain, and a further 15 did not take part in the proceedings, according to the Assembly of States Parties. Kaukoranta confirmed that the 82 states determined Khan had engaged in conduct prohibited under the court's framework, specifically against a subordinate, rising to the level of serious misconduct and a serious breach of duty.
Case Rooted in Assistant's Complaint of Sexual Misconduct
The chain of events that led to Friday's vote began with a formal complaint lodged by a Malaysian lawyer who had served as Khan's direct assistant. The complainant has been identified publicly only by her first name, according to legal news outlet JURIST. Her account centred on allegations of non-consensual sexual acts, which formed the basis of a lengthy investigation carried out by the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services — a probe that lasted more than a year and was commissioned by the Assembly's own oversight body.
Khan stepped away from his duties on a leave of absence in May 2025 when the inquiry was formally launched. He was then suspended by the Assembly's executive committee on June 8, 2026, pending the outcome of the full membership vote, according to Inquirer.net. In the days immediately before the ballot, the complainant gave a televised public account of her allegations and firmly rejected suggestions that she had acted at the direction of any state, according to MSN. Khan has maintained throughout the process that he is innocent of all wrongdoing.
Khan's Legal Team Contests the Process as Politically Motivated
Tayab Ali of Bindmans LLP, representing Khan, made clear his client would challenge the Assembly's decision. Ali argued that a judicial panel had already unanimously found that the OIOS investigation did not establish misconduct or a breach of duty under the applicable legal standards, and that the Assembly's vote defied both the evidence and that finding, according to Al Jazeera.
Ali further contended that Khan and his lawyers were denied the opportunity to make formal submissions to the Assembly before the vote was held, and he characterised the entire process as politically driven and procedurally unjust. He noted that more than 180 non-governmental organisations and senior international legal figures had publicly raised due process concerns — concerns he said the Assembly disregarded, according to Fox News.
Kaukoranta pushed back directly on that characterisation, stating that the Assembly had fully respected Khan's due process rights and that the investigation had indeed produced evidence supporting the allegations against him, according to JURIST.
Duterte Trial Moves Forward Under Deputy Prosecutor Niang
The dismissal of Khan does not affect the legal proceedings against Duterte. Khan had already been disqualified from involvement in the Philippine case back in October 2025, when ICC judges determined there was a reasonable appearance of bias — stemming from the fact that he had previously represented victims of alleged extrajudicial killings in the Philippines before assuming the role of chief prosecutor, according to Philstar.com.
Deputy Prosecutor Mame Mandiaye Niang has been leading the Office of the Prosecutor's work on the Philippine situation since Khan's disqualification, and the ICC has consistently stated that neither the disqualification nor the subsequent removal affects the trajectory of the case. Following Friday's vote, the court acknowledged the Assembly's decision and affirmed that its operations would continue without disruption, commending its staff for their professionalism throughout, according to Inquirer.net.
Duterte's trial is set to open on November 30 in The Hague. He faces three counts of crimes against humanity in connection with his administration's anti-drug campaign and has been held in ICC custody since March 2025, according to VERA Files.
Washington and Jerusalem React to Khan's Ouster
The United States, which is not a member of the ICC, welcomed the removal — though not in terms favourable to the court. State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott described Khan as a "quintessential example of the ICC's corruption and abuse of its supposed authority" and said the result would do nothing to alter Washington's plans to work toward dismantling the institution, according to Israel National News.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio had announced just days earlier that the United States was mounting a comprehensive campaign against the ICC, framing it as a threat to American sovereignty. That campaign includes applying pressure on member states to withdraw from the court, imposing sanctions on organisations that cooperate with it, and denying entry to ICC personnel, according to Euronews. Washington has already sanctioned 11 ICC judges and prosecutors, a list that included Khan himself.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar described the removal as long overdue, and called for the immediate revocation of the 2024 arrest warrants issued against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, according to The Times of Israel. However, those warrants are a matter for ICC judges to decide and are entirely unaffected by the change in prosecutorial leadership.
Successor Election Pending; Venezuela Announces Withdrawal
Khan's dismissal sets in motion the formal procedure for selecting a new chief prosecutor, though no election is expected to take place before 2026 at the earliest, according to Al Jazeera. In a development that underscored the political turbulence surrounding the court, Venezuela announced within hours of the Friday ballot that it would be withdrawing from the ICC, according to The Times of Israel.
By the Numbers
- 125 — total ICC member states eligible to vote
- 82 — member states that voted in favour of Khan's removal
- 63 — absolute majority threshold required for dismissal
- 13 — member states that voted against removal
- 15 — member states that abstained
- 15 — member states that did not participate
- 180+ — NGOs and senior international lawyers who publicly raised due process concerns
- 11 — ICC judges and prosecutors sanctioned by the United States
- 24 years — the ICC's operational lifespan; this is the first prosecutor removal in its history
- November 30 — scheduled date for the opening of Duterte's trial in The Hague
- March 2025 — when Duterte entered ICC custody
Why This Matters
The expulsion of Karim Khan is without precedent in the ICC's 24-year history, making it a defining moment for the institution and raising serious questions about its internal governance, the integrity of its oversight mechanisms, and the degree to which geopolitical pressure shapes decisions within what is meant to be an independent body of international justice. For the Philippines, the vote is procedurally inconsequential: Deputy Prosecutor Niang remains at the helm of the Philippine situation, and Rodrigo Duterte's trial on three charges of crimes against humanity is firmly on course for its November 30 opening in The Hague. Beyond the immediate case, Venezuela's announcement of withdrawal and the United States' declared campaign to weaken the court reflect a broader erosion of support that threatens the ICC's long-term authority and membership base at one of the most consequential junctures in its existence.
Source: Inquirer.net, VERA Files, Al Jazeera, JURIST, Philstar.com, MSN, Fox News, Euronews, The Times of Israel, Israel National News