In a move that has sent ripples across the international legal and diplomatic landscape, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger have jointly announced their immediate withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC), denouncing the institution as an “instrument of neo-colonialist repression” and pledging to replace it with their own regional justice system. The declaration, made in a coordinated statement on September 22, 2025, marks a pivotal moment for the Sahel region, which has already been rocked by a series of military coups and shifting alliances over the past five years.
The three West African nations, now ruled by military juntas following coups between 2020 and 2023, have been ICC members for over two decades, having ratified the Rome Statute in the early 2000s. Their abrupt decision to exit the court is the latest chapter in a broader realignment that has seen them sever ties with traditional partners and regional organizations, most notably the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Earlier this year, the trio formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), a new bloc intended to foster closer cooperation among themselves and reduce foreign influence in the region.
“[The ICC is an] instrument of neocolonial repression in the hands of imperialism,” read the joint statement from the governments, as reported by Reuters and other outlets. The communique went on to accuse the court of “selective justice” and an inability to deliver on its founding mission: “The ICC has proven itself incapable of handling and prosecuting proven war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of genocide, and crimes of aggression.” The statement further asserted that the ICC “maintains a disconcerting and complacent silence regarding the perpetrators of such crimes, relentlessly pursuing certain actors who do not belong to the closed circle of beneficiaries of institutionalized international impunity.”
According to the BBC, the three countries have also refused to recognize the authority of the UN-backed court, based in The Hague. Their leaders have signaled a commitment to developing “indigenous mechanisms for the consolidation of peace and justice,” a sentiment echoed by the AES, which has already begun laying the groundwork for the Sahelian Criminal and Human Rights Court (CPS-DH). This new court, inspired by international models but grounded in local realities, is set to have jurisdiction over terrorism, war crimes, and genocide, and will operate its own maximum-security prison and a unified digital database of accused or convicted individuals.
The decision to leave the ICC follows a pattern of distancing from Western institutions and increasing alignment with Russia. All three countries have scaled back military cooperation with European powers, particularly France, and have deepened ties with Moscow for both security and diplomatic support. The presence of the Wagner Group, a Russian private military company, is especially notable in Mali, where over 2,000 fighters are reportedly stationed. This realignment comes amid growing anti-French sentiment and a broader rejection of what the juntas and their supporters perceive as lingering colonial influence.
The withdrawal from the ICC is not without controversy or criticism. International human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have accused both the jihadist militants and the security forces of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger of committing serious abuses, including potential war crimes and crimes against humanity. In Mali, the ICC has been conducting an open investigation since 2013 into alleged war crimes in the northern cities of Gao, Timbuktu, and Kidal, which were briefly under jihadist control. In Burkina Faso, reports indicate that the military executed more than 220 civilians, including at least 56 children, in February 2024. Niger, too, has faced allegations of military abuses against civilians, with Amnesty International documenting incidents such as a drone strike that killed 50 villagers.
Critics of the ICC, both within Africa and beyond, have long argued that the court disproportionately targets the continent. Of the 33 cases the ICC has opened since its inception in 2002, all but one have involved African countries. The only exception is Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, who was charged with crimes against humanity. This perception of bias has fueled resentment and skepticism about the court's impartiality, with African Union officials and leaders such as Rwanda's President Paul Kagame voicing similar concerns in the past. The joint statement from Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger echoed these sentiments, accusing the ICC of targeting “less privileged countries.”
Yet, some observers suggest that the real motivation for the withdrawal may be more pragmatic. As Owiso Owiso, an expert in international law, told The New York Times, “It may be a case of the juntas trying to minimize their potential exposure to the ICC. If that’s the case, then what appears to be performative Pan-Africanism is a very convenient excuse.” Others point to the growing solidarity with Russia, especially since the ICC issued an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin in 2023 over alleged war crimes in Ukraine. Russia itself withdrew its signature from the Rome Statute in 2016, after the ICC ruled that its annexation of Crimea amounted to an “ongoing occupation.”
Under the terms of the Rome Statute, a country's withdrawal from the ICC takes effect one year after the United Nations is officially notified. Until then, the court technically retains jurisdiction over crimes committed while the countries were still members. The ICC, for its part, has declined to comment on the withdrawal, a stance it has often taken in the face of high-profile departures and criticisms.
Historically, the ICC has faced challenges in enforcing its mandates, especially when powerful states or their allies are involved. The United States, for example, never joined the court, citing concerns that it might one day prosecute American citizens. The Trump administration even imposed sanctions on several ICC judges after the court issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. South Africa, Gambia, and Burundi have all announced intentions to withdraw in the past, but only Burundi followed through, officially leaving the court in 2017.
Despite the criticisms, the ICC has had notable successes. In 2016, Ahmad al-Faqi al-Mahdi, a member of an extremist group in Mali, was convicted of destroying cultural heritage in Timbuktu—a landmark case that international law experts hoped would set a precedent for similar prosecutions elsewhere. Yet, the court's track record remains a subject of fierce debate, with supporters viewing it as one of the few avenues for accountability in regions where domestic justice systems are weak or compromised.
As Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger chart their own course, the international community is left to ponder the implications. Will the new Sahelian court deliver the justice and accountability its architects promise, or will it serve as a shield for the powerful? For now, the region stands at a crossroads, with the echoes of history—and the weight of ongoing conflicts—shaping its uncertain path forward.