AMSTERDAM--Just days after the United States' government revoked the visa of the International Criminal Court's prosecutor, judges at the ICC on Friday rejected her request to open an investigation into alleged atrocities in the war in Afghanistan, citing practical reasons.
The decision, which prosecutor Fatou Bensouda may appeal, angered human rights groups and means that the Taliban, the Afghan government and the United States will not face any investigation at the ICC for their alleged crimes, which dated mostly from 2003-04.
U.S. President Donald Trump called the decision "a major international victory," and denounced the international court for its "broad, unaccountable, prosecutorial powers," as well as for what he considers its threat to American sovereignty. "Any attempt to target American, Israeli or allied personnel for prosecution will be met with a swift and vigorous response," Trump said.
White House National Security Advisor John Bolton, a sharp critic of the ICC, called the ruling a "vindication" of the U.S.' tough policy against the court that he has engineered and a "stinging defeat" for the prosecutors.
He told reporters that even the cases of ousted Sudan President Omar al-Bashir and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who Washington wants to step down, should fall under the jurisdiction of their home countries, and not the ICC. "Fundamentally, political maturation and responsibility requires that people be held responsible by their own societies," Bolton said.
In an unusual ruling, the ICC judges said Bensouda's case seemed to have met the court's criteria for jurisdiction and admissibility, but given an array of practical considerations that made chances of success remote, it did not make sense to pursue it further. They cited a failure to gather evidence at an early stage, a lack of cooperation from governments involved, and the likely costs as prohibitive.
In addition, "the current circumstances of the situation in Afghanistan are such as to make the prospects for a successful investigation and prosecution extremely limited," the judges said in a 2-1 ruling. "An investigation into the situation in Afghanistan at this stage would not serve the interests of justice and (the chamber) accordingly rejects the request," the judges said.
Bensouda said her office would "consider all available legal remedies" against the decision.
International legal experts saw the ruling in part as a recognition of the realities the court faces in conducting prosecutions. Human rights groups were incensed. The decision "is insane and politically charged," Karine Bonneau, director of international justice at the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), said in a tweet.
The ruling was "an affirmation of double standards. This situation was exactly why the court was created," she added.
