Lower House discusses protection of International Criminal Court
D66 wants the Netherlands to press more actively for European protection against US sanctions.
The Lower House will discuss US sanctions against the International Criminal Court on Wednesday. D66 wants the Netherlands to push harder at European level for the use of the so-called blocking statute, while the government’s precise position remains subject to debate.
The committee debate on sanctions against the International Criminal Court is scheduled for Wednesday from 10:00 to 13:00. Foreign Minister T.B.W. Berendsen will discuss, among other things, the Dutch position on a special meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute.
The immediate cause is US pressure on the court and on people who work with it. A parliamentary document from April states that the United States has sanctioned several ICC judges and prosecutors. Organisations that work with the court are also said to have been affected, according to that document.
D66 MP Hanneke van der Werf called on 1 September for a separate committee debate on the issue. The standing committee for Foreign Affairs agreed to the request. This formally puts the subject back on the agenda, after the Lower House had already adopted a motion on European protection in April.
The motion was tabled by, among others, Dobbe, Piri, Van der Werf, Dassen and Van Baarle. The Lower House asked the government to continue working at EU level for the application of the blocking statute and to speak out publicly in favour of the Court’s independence. The motion received 79 votes in favour and 70 against.
The blocking statute is European legislation intended to protect European institutions and companies from the effects of certain foreign sanctions. Its application is politically sensitive because it could place European companies in conflict between US sanctions rules and European rules. The instrument exists, but the question is how far the Netherlands and the European Union want to use it in this case.
The Netherlands is host country to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. This gives the debate a national dimension, but does not mean that the Netherlands can independently lift or neutralise all sanctions. Many measures affect financial institutions and international organisations, making European coordination important.
The public parliamentary documents do make clear that D66 is calling for a more active European line. Before the meeting, no fully developed joint public position from CDA and VVD on the debate was available. The debate may therefore primarily clarify whether the government is prepared to expand its existing diplomatic efforts.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The United States has sanctioned individuals and organisations connected with the ICC.
- The Netherlands is host country to the International Criminal Court.
- The Lower House has previously called for European protection through the blocking statute.
- The government is discussing the issue with the Lower House.
Left
Arguments The Netherlands and the EU should actively protect the Court, because international law must also be able to hold powerful countries and their allies to account. Waiting leaves European rule-of-law institutions vulnerable.
Values Equality before the law, human rights, the international legal order and multilateral cooperation.
Consequences A firm European line could protect the Court operationally, but could also lead to economic or diplomatic countermeasures from the United States.
Centre
Arguments The Netherlands should protect the Court as its host country, but chiefly through European coordination and legally careful instruments. A symbolic confrontation without workable protection does not help the Court.
Values The rule of law, institutional continuity, proportionality and European cooperation.
Consequences A coordinated approach could limit the risks for companies, but takes time and may be less visible.
Right
Arguments The Netherlands should avoid automatically manoeuvring itself into a conflict with Washington. Protecting the Court is important, but national security, economic interests and relations with allies must carry significant weight.
Values National responsibility, security, feasibility and transatlantic cooperation.
Consequences Restraint could prevent escalation with the US, but supporters of the ICC may see it as inadequate defence of the legal order.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article’s core is based on official parliamentary documents and a current parliamentary agenda. The precise positions of other parties are explicitly marked as incompletely documented.
- confirmed The Lower House is discussing sanctions against the International Criminal Court on 30 September 2026. — The official parliamentary agenda lists the committee debate from 10:00 to 13:00. source
- confirmed A parliamentary majority adopted a motion in April on applying the blocking statute. — The vote was 79 in favour and 70 against. source
- confirmed The motion called for European protection against US sanctions against the ICC. — This is stated in the text of the motion. source
- confirmed The precise current positions of CDA and VVD had not been fully set out publicly beforehand. — The official parliamentary documents consulted contain no fully joint position from the two groups on this debate. source
Editor's note
The parliamentary debate and the earlier motion have been confirmed. The current positions of parties other than D66 have not been fully set out publicly; they have therefore been described cautiously.Sources
- Commissiedebat Sancties tegen het Internationaal Strafhof — Tweede Kamer
- Motie over toepassing van het blocking statute — Tweede Kamer
- Stemming over de motie inzake het Internationaal Strafhof — Ikregeer
- Beleid voor internationale sancties — Rijksoverheid
More on this in Dutch media
- NRC — „internationaal strafhof”
- NU.nl — „internationaal strafhof”
- De Telegraaf — „internationaal strafhof”