South Africa backs ICC after new US sanctions
Nobel Peace Prize winner Navi Pillay calls on countries to stand up jointly for the International Criminal Court.
Follow-up to: EU opts for diplomacy after US ICC sanctions Monday, 12 October 2026, 19:28
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
South Africa has once again voiced its support for the International Criminal Court after the United States imposed sanctions on the court. Nobel Peace Prize winner Navi Pillay called on Washington on Tuesday to resume its role as a defender of human rights.
Deputy Justice Minister Andries Nel said on Monday at a summit on social justice that South Africa was deeply concerned about the US sanctions. The country would continue to support the International Criminal Court as a party to the Rome Statute, he said.
The United States announced sanctions against the International Criminal Court as an institution on 9 October. The court said in response that the measure threatened its independence and the international legal order. Washington has previously also sanctioned individual judges and prosecutors.
Pillay spoke to Reuters in The Hague on Tuesday about the consequences. She said the United States should, in her view, return to a leading role in protecting human rights. Pillay previously served as a judge at the International Criminal Court and is now an ad hoc judge at the International Court of Justice.
The timing gives the issue additional political weight. Pillay received the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for her work on international justice and human rights. Hours later, Washington announced the new sanctions against the International Criminal Court.
The US government opposes investigations into and prosecutions of American citizens and allies who, it argues, fall outside the court’s jurisdiction. The International Criminal Court counters that it was established to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression.
The issue is directly relevant to the Netherlands because the International Criminal Court is based in The Hague. US restrictions on financial services, technology and transactions could affect practical cooperation involving the institution, although it has not been established which activities would be concretely affected.
The South African response fits into a broader debate about how international judges can work independently when powerful countries reject their decisions. South Africa is clearly opting for institutional support; the United States, by contrast, emphasises national sovereignty and accountability to its own citizens.
The sanctions therefore represent not only a conflict between Washington and one court, but also a test of support from countries that have signed the Rome Statute. How European countries respond will help determine how much political room the International Criminal Court retains.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The United States has imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court.
- South Africa has voiced its support for the court.
- Navi Pillay has criticised the US measure.
- The International Criminal Court is based in The Hague.
Left
Arguments According to this approach, sanctions against an international court undermine the ability to hold powerful states accountable for serious crimes. Countries should continue to support the court financially and politically.
Values International solidarity, human rights and equality before the law.
Consequences Supporting the International Criminal Court can protect its independence, but may also deepen the confrontation with Washington.
Centre
Arguments Criticism of the court’s jurisdiction and working methods is legitimate, but sanctions against judges and institutions should not replace normal legal proceedings. Reform, transparency and diplomacy can coexist with institutional support.
Values The rule of law, balance and international cooperation.
Consequences An institutional middle way can preserve cooperation, but requires concessions from both the court and the United States.
Right
Arguments According to this approach, the United States should protect its own citizens and military personnel from prosecution by a court over which Washington has no full political control. National sovereignty and democratic accountability carry more weight than universal jurisdiction.
Values National self-determination, democratic control and protection of citizens.
Consequences Greater distance from the International Criminal Court may increase US policy freedom, but critics say it weakens the international response to serious crimes.
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 current responses have been confirmed by official South African and ICC sources and by Reuters. The possible practical consequences are cautiously worded because they have not yet been made concrete.
- confirmed South Africa voiced its support for the International Criminal Court on 12 October. — This is stated in the declaration by Deputy Minister Andries Nel. source
- confirmed The United States imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court as an institution on 9 October. — The ICC describes the measure in its 9 October statement. source
- confirmed Navi Pillay called on the United States to resume its role as a defender of human rights. — Reuters quotes Pillay in her conversation in The Hague on 13 October. source
- confirmed Pillay was a judge at the International Criminal Court and is an ad hoc judge at the International Court of Justice. — This is confirmed by the South African government statement and Reuters. source
Editor's note
The US sanctions, the South African response and Pillay’s call are certain. The concrete operational consequences for the International Criminal Court have not yet been publicly set out in detail.Sources
- Statement of Commitment by Deputy Minister Nel at the 8th Social Justice Summit — South African Department of Justice
- Nobel peace laureate Navi Pillay urges US to defend human rights — Reuters via Investing.com
- The ICC strongly rejects US sanctions against the institution — International Criminal Court
- President Cyril Ramaphosa congratulates Navi Pillay — South African Government
The story so far
- Monday, 12 October 2026, 19:28 EU opts for diplomacy after US ICC sanctions
- Tuesday, 13 October 2026, 21:28 South Africa backs ICC after new US sanctions (this article)
More on this in Dutch media
- Het Parool — „zuid-afrika navi pillay”
- Trouw — „zuid-afrika navi pillay”
- NRC — „zuid-afrika navi pillay”