ICC limits Afghanistan investigation to Taliban crimes
Judges end section that could have implicated US military personnel; prosecutor appeals.
There is news on this story (Saturday, 14 November 2026, 07:02): Rubio attacks International Criminal Court in speech
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.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has limited its Afghanistan investigation to possible crimes by the Taliban. The section in which US military personnel or intelligence officers could also have been investigated has been ended, court documents made public on Friday show.
The decision was taken on Thursday and made public a day later. According to the judges, the Office of the Prosecutor faces significant constraints in conducting investigations and securing evidence. The public decision does not explain in further detail which constraints proved decisive.
The Office of the Prosecutor has already challenged the decision, according to the Associated Press. The investigation into the Taliban will continue as a separate investigation. The ICC will therefore continue investigating possible international crimes attributed to the Taliban.
The original investigation, authorised in 2020, concerned possible crimes since 2002 by Afghan government forces, the Taliban, US military personnel and US intelligence officers. Former chief prosecutor Karim Khan decided in 2022 to give lower priority to elements that could implicate Americans, partly because of difficulties obtaining evidence.
The ruling comes amid strained relations between the Court and the United States. According to AP, Washington does not recognise the ICC’s jurisdiction. The Trump administration has imposed sanctions on the Court and thirteen current and former staff members. According to AP, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also threatened to dismantle the Court step by step.
The investigation into the Taliban is continuing in the meantime. Last month, the ICC made arrest warrants public for four senior Taliban officials. They are suspected of crimes against humanity for persecuting women, girls and LGBTQ+ people since the Taliban seized power again in 2021. The arrest warrants do not constitute convictions.
The ruling is relevant to the Netherlands because the Court is based in The Hague and because it touches on how far international jurisdiction extends when evidence is difficult to access and powerful states do not cooperate. At the same time, the case shows that limiting an investigation is not the same as an acquittal: it concerns the scope and feasibility of the investigation, not a finding that the alleged acts did not take place.
Also show where in Europe and in the world
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The ICC has ended the section of the Afghanistan investigation that could have involved US personnel.
- The investigation into possible crimes by the Taliban is continuing as a separate case.
- The prosecutor has appealed the decision.
- The United States does not recognise the ICC’s jurisdiction and has imposed sanctions on the Court and its staff.
Left
Arguments An international court must also be able to investigate military personnel from powerful countries; closing the US section could be seen as weakening equal justice.
Values Equality before the law, protection of victims and international human rights.
Consequences Victims of possible US actions may have less chance of an independent investigation, while confidence in international institutions could decline.
Centre
Arguments The Court must operate within its legal powers and deal realistically with evidence, state cooperation and the feasibility of prosecutions.
Values The rule of law, procedural diligence and institutional independence.
Consequences A separate investigation could improve feasibility, but the appeal must clarify whether the limitation was legally sound.
Right
Arguments International judges should be cautious about investigating military action by non-member states and should not replace national legal systems.
Values National sovereignty, democratic accountability and the protection of national security interests.
Consequences The limitation may reduce tensions with Washington, but it could also reinforce the impression that international prosecutions are mainly used against weaker parties.
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 central claim is based on the public ICC decision and an independent summary by the Associated Press. The text distinguishes between the ended US section and the continuing Taliban investigation.
- confirmed The ICC ended the section of the Afghanistan investigation that could have implicated US military personnel. — The Associated Press describes the ruling as ending the section that could have concerned US military personnel. source
- confirmed The decision was taken on Thursday and made public on Friday. — AP reports that the decision was taken on Thursday and made public on Friday. source
- confirmed The Office of the Prosecutor lodged an appeal. — AP reports that the prosecutor’s office had already challenged the decision. source
- confirmed The Taliban investigation was split off as a separate investigation. — This is stated in AP’s summary of the court decision. source
- confirmed The ICC made arrest warrants for four senior Taliban officials public last month. — AP mentions the publication of the warrants and the allegations of gender persecution. source
Editor's note
It is certain that the ICC has ended the section of the Afghanistan investigation that could have implicated US military personnel and is continuing the Taliban section separately. The public decision cites constraints on investigation and evidence-gathering; the precise constraints have not been explained further.Sources
- ICC judges end part of probe that deals with US action in Afghanistan — Associated Press
- Decision closing the situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan — International Criminal Court
The story so far
- Saturday, 14 November 2026, 00:02 ICC limits Afghanistan investigation to Taliban crimes (this article)
- Saturday, 14 November 2026, 07:02 Rubio attacks International Criminal Court in speech