ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan Under Investigation for Sexual Misconduct Amid Rising Leadership Scrutiny

The Hague, Nov 12 – The International Criminal Court (ICC) is under the spotlight as its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, faces an external investigation over allegations of sexual misconduct. The inquiry, announced by the court’s governing body, Assembly of States Parties (ASP) on November 11, marks a significant shift from an internal investigation previously requested by Khan himself.

ASP President Päivi Kaukoranta said in statement that an independent inquiry was being pursued to ensure “a fully independent, impartial and fair process” in line with the legal framework of the court and a victim-centered approach. This decision complicates further Khan’s already strained leadership at the ICC, especially amidst the intense pressure and scrutiny of the court’s handling of high-profile cases, such as his pursuit of war crimes charges in Gaza.

The allegations against Khan reportedly involve unwanted sexual advances directed at a female lawyer over a sustained period.  Khan, through his legal representatives, has denied all allegations. These claims were first brought to the public’s attention in a report by The Guardian, end of October, which also noted that the accuser expressed concerns about the competence of the ICC’s internal watchdog, Independent Oversight Mechanism (IOM).  According to The Guardian, the IOM had initially been in communication with the alleged victim but did not move forward with an investigation due to perceived limitations in its mandate and concerns over potential conflicts of interest.

The alleged victim, described as a lawyer in her 30s, has chosen not to comment publicly but has reportedly indicated her willingness to cooperate with an independent investigation. Inside the prosecutor’s office, where Khan oversees approximately 450 staff, there has been notable concern about the implications of the allegations, according to the Guardian.

In a public statement, Khan confirmed he would continue fulfilling his responsibilities as ICC Prosecutor. However, he has delegated oversight of the internal handling of the allegations to his two deputy prosecutors, who have established an independent coordination group for addressing related issues without direct reporting to him. In statement following these allegations, Khan expressed his openness to cooperating with the external investigation and underlined that this arrangement would allow him to continue managing other prosecutorial duties in alignment with his mandate. Initially, Khan requested that the ICC’s IOM investigate the allegations against him, but concerns about the IOM’s impartiality led to calls for an external review.

The ASP is now finalizing the “practical modalities” of the investigation, and while specific details are still pending, the governing body has communicated to all involved parties that an “external investigative entity will be responsible for handling the case.” Kaukoranta said, insisting that though IOM typically handles such investigations and has “full operational independence” from the ICC, it had expressed no objection to an external approach due to possible perceived conflicts of interest and the unique nature of this case. “Given the particular circumstances of this case, including the IOM’s victim-centred approach, and perceptions of possible and future conflicts of interest, the IOM has indicated that it has no objection to exceptionally resorting to an external investigation,” Kaukoranta said.

The announcement of the external investigation arrives as the ICC engages in high-profile cases, including ongoing investigations into alleged war crimes in Gaza, which have attracted international scrutiny. Khan recently submitted applications for arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a former defense minister, citing alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with actions in Gaza.

The ICC, based in The Hague, was established in 2002 under the Rome Statute to prosecute the most serious international crimes, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. As an international court of last resort, the ICC was envisioned to play a critical role in pursuing justice for crimes that national courts are unable or unwilling to address. This mandate has placed the ICC at the center of various high-profile international cases, some of which involve powerful political figures and nations resistant to ICC jurisdiction.

While Khan has not directly connected the sexual misconduct allegations with his involvement in the Gaza investigation, he acknowledged the complex political pressures facing the ICC, alluding to efforts by unnamed entities to undermine his position, while simultaneously calling for a probe into alleged “disinformation” related to the accusations. In response to the allegations, Khan noted with “deep sadness” that the accusations had entered the public sphere and maintained that there was “no truth to suggestions of such misconduct.”

The timing of these allegations has led some to speculate about the motivations behind the accusations, particularly in light of the ICC’s ongoing cases. The court’s pursuit of arrest warrants related to Gaza has drawn international attention and increased scrutiny of the ICC’s operations. Given that Khan’s pursuit of Israeli leaders is one of the court’s most contentious cases, the allegations against him have raised concerns about potential attempts to destabilize the ICC’s prosecutorial efforts.

Karim Khan’s tenure as Chief Prosecutor has been marked by controversial cases, including his past work, particularly in Kenya, where he played a critical role in defending then-Deputy President William Ruto during ICC proceedings. Ruto faced charges related to his alleged role in Kenya’s 2007-2008 post-election violence, which led to significant loss of life and displacement. The ICC eventually dropped the charges against Ruto, citing insufficient evidence.

However, the case remains highly controversial, with some alleging that witness tampering and political interference played a role in the case’s outcome. Khan’s involvement in this high-profile defense has contributed to his complex reputation within the ICC and among member states, particularly in Africa, where the ICC has faced criticism over perceptions of bias and selective prosecution.

Khan’s work in Kenya’s case established him as a figure with deep connections to powerful leaders in the region, including President Ruto. Khan’s visit to Kenya in August 2023 raised serious controversy, particularly due to his role as ICC Prosecutor and his past involvement in defending President Ruto during the post-election violence cases. Khan visited the country to receive an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from Mount Kenya University (MKU), where he was recognized for his contribution to justice and humanity.

However, this visit sparked concerns, especially from opposition figures, who questioned the timing and potential conflicts of interest, given the ongoing investigations then into police brutality in Kenya. They worried that his presence could undermine the credibility of the ICC, especially as Azimio la Umoja leaders were preparing to submit a case concerning the deaths of protesters during March 2023 demonstrations. Khan himself recused himself from Kenyan cases to avoid any conflict of interest, emphasizing that his visit was in a private capacity. For many, his history with Ruto raised questions about the ICC’s impartiality, particularly given Khan’s subsequent role as Prosecutor. The intersection of his past defense work and current prosecutorial responsibilities adds another layer of complexity to the current allegations and the challenges facing the ICC.

Within the prosecutor’s office in The Hague, the allegations have reportedly led to heightened concerns over Khan’s response strategy, particularly as accusations emerged in public forums. According to the Guardian, several senior staff have advocated for Khan’s temporary leave, proposing this as a measure to prevent potential reputational damage to the office during the investigation. Khan’s refusal to step aside, combined with his decision to assign deputies to oversee the response to the allegations, has created a cautious balance between operational continuity and procedural impartiality.