Venezuela’s ICC exit deepens questions over justice, US influence Opinion by Al Jazeera

Venezuela has formally notified the United Nations of its withdrawal from the Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), in a move that analysts say reflects a significant shift in the country's foreign policy while adding pressure on an international court already facing mounting political challenges, according to Al Jazeera.

Foreign Minister Felix Plasencia announced on July 24 that Interim President Delcy Rodriguez had ordered the withdrawal, describing the decision as "firm and irrevocable." Plasencia argued that the ICC had demonstrated a "geographical bias" by disproportionately targeting countries in Africa and Latin America.

The United States welcomed the move, praising Rodriguez for joining what it called "American-led efforts to dismantle the corrupt and worthless ICC." The U.S. State Department also criticised the court for spending years investigating former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro "with no result" and urged other ICC member states to withdraw from the Rome Statute.

Investigation will continue

Despite Venezuela's decision, legal experts told Al Jazeera that the withdrawal is unlikely to affect the ICC's ongoing investigation into alleged crimes against humanity committed during the country's crackdown on anti-government protests beginning in 2017.

The ICC said it had not yet received formal notification through the UN treaty office, adding that under the Rome Statute, withdrawal takes effect one year after notification and does not affect existing investigations or proceedings already before the court.

“There certainly was a time where that was more persuasive,” Mark Kersten, a professor of human rights and international criminal law at the University of the Fraser Valley, told Al Jazeera on July 27, referring to criticism that the ICC disproportionately targeted African leaders. “But now you have [Russia’s] Vladimir Putin. You have [Israel’s] Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant. You have investigations into contexts that aren’t Global South contexts.”

Analysts noted that while the legal investigation can continue, Venezuela's withdrawal signals that Caracas is unlikely to cooperate with the court.

“The court’s practical capacity to act has always depended on state cooperation,” Francisco Rodriguez, a senior research fellow at the Centre for Economic and Policy Research and founder of Oil for Venezuela, told Al Jazeera.

“That matters because many of the officials covered by the investigation are still in office, and several have been promoted,” he said. “The signal to them is that the accountability track has been closed as part of a bargain with Washington.”

Growing alignment with Washington

The timing of Venezuela's withdrawal has reinforced perceptions that President Delcy Rodriguez's administration is increasingly aligning itself with U.S. foreign policy.

“I have argued before that Venezuela is a protectorate in all but name, and this ratifies it,” Rodriguez said. “A government that abandons a multilateral treaty commitment on the timetable of another country’s diplomatic campaign is not conducting a foreign policy of its own.”

He added: “The US welcomed the withdrawal publicly and urged other states to follow, which tells you whose agenda is being advanced.”

The move follows a broader campaign by the Trump administration against the ICC, including calls for member states to leave the court and criticism of its jurisdiction over U.S. allies.

Another challenge for the ICC

Venezuela's departure comes amid growing pressure on the ICC. Chad also announced plans to withdraw from the Rome Statute, citing concerns over the court's effectiveness and what it described as an uneven focus on African cases. The decision follows similar announcements by Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger.

The court has also been shaken by the dismissal of its elected chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, over allegations of sexual assault, which he denies.

Despite these setbacks, Kersten argued that the greatest threat to the ICC comes not from Washington but from its own members.

“It’s not US opposition that kills the ICC,” he said. “It’s going to be the silence and indifference of its member states.”

“I think that’s the real response,” he added. “Not just a rhetorical one.”

By Sabina Mammadli