Concerns have been raised regarding the handling and timing of misconduct claims against Karim Khan, following his efforts to secure arrest warrants for Israeli leaders.
According to four former judges, the International Criminal Court’s management of a sexual misconduct inquiry into its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, raises significant questions concerning its timing and adherence to proper procedures.
This investigation surfaced subsequent to Khan’s decision in May 2024 to seek arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant, accusing them of crimes against humanity.
Previously, the ICC official had also obtained a warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin related to the alleged deportation of Ukrainian children. Both Russia and Israel do not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction. Moscow has labeled the court’s accusations as “outrageous” and emphasized that its rulings are legally “null and void for Russia.”
While the warrant for Putin was met with approval from Kyiv’s Western allies – including the US, despite Washington’s own non-recognition of the court – the case involving Netanyahu provoked a strong negative reaction.
The United States imposed sanctions on Khan and four ICC judges, asserting that the charges were politically motivated and cautioning of additional punitive actions.
Soon after the Israeli warrants were issued, allegations of sexual misconduct against Khan came to light. Former ICC judge Cuno Tarfusser expressed to Middle East Eye that he was “deeply disturbed, even scandalized,” by the process, suggesting the investigation appeared “tailored” for Khan. Another former judge cautioned that the procedure had entered “bandit country” where “anything can happen.”
The court’s supervisory body, the Assembly of States Parties, faced further criticism for publicly identifying Khan and outsourcing the inquiry to the UN’s Office of Internal Oversight Services, despite the fact that the ICC’s internal mechanisms had previously closed two internal investigations after the complainant refused to cooperate.
As Middle East Eye reported, the initial complaint was filed as Khan was preparing the Israeli warrants. The allegations re-emerged months later just before the warrants were announced, and escalated in May 2025 as Khan reportedly pursued additional charges against Israeli officials.
Le Monde has also reported that British lawyer Andrew Cayley, who spearheaded the ICC’s Palestine investigation, was warned by Dutch intelligence that he was considered “an enemy of Israel” and subsequently advised by the UK Foreign Office that he might face US sanctions. He later resigned from his position.