In a bold and defiant move, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have formally withdrawn from the International Criminal Court (ICC), dealing a heavy blow to the global justice system’s credibility and raising fresh questions about accountability in conflict zones. The three Sahel nations, all currently under military-led governments, accuse the ICC of bias against African countries and of serving Western interests rather than delivering impartial justice.
The decision was announced simultaneously by the foreign ministries of all three nations, which have recently deepened their political and military alliance under the banner of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES). Their joint statement argued that the ICC has “failed to uphold its founding principles” and accused it of targeting African leaders while ignoring crimes committed by Western powers.
This is not the first time African leaders have clashed with the ICC. For years, critics on the continent have complained that the Hague-based court disproportionately prosecutes African cases, with most of its investigations focused on the continent. Kenya’s Uhuru Kenyatta, Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir, and Ivory Coast’s Laurent Gbagbo have all faced indictments, fuelling a narrative that the ICC is a tool of neo-colonial interference.
But the timing of this withdrawal is particularly significant. The three countries are locked in a brutal fight against jihadist insurgencies that have killed tens of thousands and displaced millions. Their military rulers — Assimi Goïta in Mali, Ibrahim Traoré in Burkina Faso, and Abdourahamane Tiani in Niger — have accused international organisations, including the United Nations and the ICC, of undermining their security efforts. Since staging coups between 2020 and 2023, these governments have distanced themselves from traditional Western partners, expelling French troops and turning to Russia for security assistance.
Legal experts warn that leaving the ICC could shield government and military officials from future war crimes investigations, particularly as allegations of extrajudicial killings, torture, and civilian abuses have surfaced in all three countries. Human-rights groups say the withdrawals are an attempt to create a legal “safe zone” for ruling juntas as they wage counter-insurgency campaigns with little external oversight.
Supporters of the decision, however, see it as a matter of sovereignty. “For too long, African justice has been dictated from The Hague,” said one Malian political analyst. “The Sahel countries are asserting their right to handle justice on their own terms.” Some regional commentators argue that the ICC’s failure to investigate foreign military interventions — including alleged civilian casualties from French and U.S. airstrikes — has delegitimised the court in the eyes of many Africans.
International reaction has been swift. The ICC issued a brief statement expressing regret over the decision and warning that it could embolden perpetrators of serious crimes. The European Union and the United States have urged the three nations to reconsider, citing the importance of accountability in preventing atrocities.
Within Africa, the move could reignite debate over the continent’s relationship with the court. The African Union has previously discussed a mass withdrawal from the ICC but has never gone through with it. If other states follow Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger’s lead, the court’s already fragile authority could be further eroded.
For ordinary citizens in these countries, the withdrawal is a double-edged sword. On one hand, there is pride in standing up to perceived Western hypocrisy; on the other, there is fear that crimes committed during the conflict will go unpunished. With jihadist violence escalating, displaced communities worry that they are losing one of the few avenues for justice.
This decision marks another step in the geopolitical realignment of the Sahel. By turning their backs on the ICC, the three states are sending a message that they will chart their own course — even if that means walking away from global institutions. Whether this leads to stronger home-grown justice systems or a deepening culture of impunity remains to be seen.
For now, the message from Bamako, Ouagadougou, and Niamey is loud and clear: the Sahel no longer wants its justice delivered from a courtroom in The Hague.
