Job Alert!

Are you someone who believes, to your core, that all victims and survivors of atrocities – regardless of who they are or where they live – deserve justice and accountability?

Do you have experience in prosecuting complex cases and powerful figures? Can you withstand immense amounts of pressure and efforts by hostile regimes to thwart your work and threaten your family?

Is your conviction that all people deserve to live with dignity so strong that you are willing to be sanctioned by the United States of America on your first day of work? 

If that sounds like you, this job could just be perfect: Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.

***************

The search for a new ICC chief Prosecutor is on.

Against the backdrop of geopolitical turmoil and threats against the ICC, the risks inherent for whoever takes up the chief Prosecutor position are obvious. As Melanie O’Brien asks: “Who is now going to want to nominate for a position that has such challenges, because they know they will automatically be sanctioned by the U.S.?”

But what makes filling the position so difficult is what simultaneously makes identifying the right person so exceptionally important. It may sound trite, but never has the choice of the next Prosecutor been more important. Never before could it so reasonably be argued that if the wrong person is chosen, they could be the last chief Prosecutor of the ICC.

I do not mean to say this to be dramatic; the challenges facing the ICC are existential and the person filling the role of chief Prosecutor will have to guide their office through unprecedented political headwaters without sacrificing the independence or impartiality of the Court. As Tom Dannenbaum says: states must find someone “who is willing to pursue investigations and cases against the most powerful actors in the system, despite the extraordinary forces being deployed in the opposite direction.”

Of course, the chief Prosecutor is not the only senior ICC official responsible for the Court’s future. But because of their responsibility in determining investigations and guiding prosecutions, and because the public (and states) widely view the Prosecutor as the ‘face’ of the institution, the future of the ICC will be shaped by their hands, in ways unlike any other Court personnel.

Ezequiel Jiminez Martinez rightly calls the search for a new Prosecutor is a litmus test. An immense responsibility rests on the ICC member-states, who, must “reassure stakeholders it has the stamina to support the court in its darkest hour and elect a prosecutor worth the office and role.” 

Who might fill the void at the Court? What qualities should they possess and what criteria should matter in deciding who takes up what might be the most difficult job in the international law world?

In the coming weeks and months, names will be revealed. For now, candidates are seeking counsel from friends and advisers while testing potential support from among the world’s foreign ministries. As with every election at the ICC, some candidates will be obvious, some underwhelming, and some will take people by surprise. None will be perfect. But hopefully the field is strong and offer a diversity of backgrounds, qualifications, and attributes. It would be a good omen for the ICC if numerous world-class legal minds threw their proverbial hats in the ring. Conversely, if the slate is meagre, those seeking to diminish or destroy the ICC will point to it as a further symptom of an isolated and impotent institution.

For now and as the process to elect the next Prosecutor takes shape, let’s consider some key criteria that ICC member-states and civil society proponents of the Court should consider. What follows is not an exhaustive list, nor does it proceed in any particular order of importance. States parties to the Rome Statute, NGOs, and other observers will undoubtedly articulate their own requirements and wish-lists in due course. This is just an opening foray into a few key dynamics and considerations.

Geographical Location

The ICC has had three Prosecutors to date: Luis Moreno-Ocampo (Argentina, 2003-2012), Fatou Bensouda (The Gambia, 2012-2021) and Karim Khan (the United Kingdom, 2021-2026). The ICC’s Assembly of States Parties should encourage a cohort of candidates from as many regions as possible, but it is notable that the Court has never had a Prosecutor from the Asia-Pacific region, Eastern Europe, North America, or Australia/New Zealand. 

Citizenship and regional identities have played a role in the past. The vast majority of the ICC’s member-states come from the Global South – Africa, South America, and some in Asia. In 2012, the African Union (AU) decided to vote as a block and helped ensure the election of Bensouda. It is unclear whether the AU – or any regional body for that matter – will vote in unison again. If they do, they should be transparent and open about how they intend to protect their preferred candidates from U.S. sanctions and coercion.

As it stands, the existence of sanctions against senior ICC staff, and the likelihood that a new Prosecutor will be sanctioned as a matter of course by Trump administration, will shape the field of possible candidates. The European Union and Canada have statutes that allow them to block the effect of U.S. sanctions. To date, these statutes have not been invoked to protect persons currently sanctioned. But the ability of states to mitigate sanctions could very well influence who is willing to accept the risks inherent in running for Prosecutor. In order to encourage people to come forward as candidates, ICC member-states should therefore proactively plan on how to insulate the next Prosecutor from sanctions and communicate those plans to prospective applicants.

Gender 

In chronological order, the position of chief Prosecutor has been held by Moreno-Ocampo, Bensouda, and Khan. If the pattern continues, states will look to select a woman to lead the Office of the Prosecutor. Most recently, two of the ICC’s three senior-most positions – the Registrar, Prosecutor, and President – were held by men. 

It is notable that Bensouda was elected in 2012 when the AU demanded that gender equity be a consideration in the selection of the Prosecutor. There are many women qualified for the job; there always have been. However, it remains to be seen how many put themselves forward and how centrally member states place the matter of gender to their decision-making.

Strategic Planning

We need to talk about practice. Specifically, proponents of the ICC don’t talk enough about the strategic practices of the Office of the Prosecutor. Instead, debates regarding the performance of the Prosecutor typically over-emphasize outcomes: where should the Prosecutor investigate, who should be targeted for prosecution, and how many convictions have been secured? 

Many who support the Court are supportive precisely because they agree with the outcomes of decision-making with the Office of the Prosecutor, rather than the strategic wisdom and the processes that lead to them. At the risk of once again sounding trite, never before has strategic practice been more important for the Court.

There was a brief time, in the mid-2010s, when strategy was central to discussions on ICC decision-making. The tenure of Fatou Bensouda resulted in a (fairly transparent) decision to (sometimes) focus investigative and prosecutorial efforts on small- and mid-level perpetrators, rather than on the ‘most responsible’. The thinking was that, by doing so, the Office of the Prosecutor could build better cases up the chain of command against those who bore the greatest responsibility for atrocity crimes. Put another way, starting with lower-level figures could help investigators build bigger and stronger cases.

The fruits of this strategy were modest but notable. In particular, the ICC managed to get a relatively low-level suspect from Mali, Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, surrendered to the Court in 2015. Before he even arrived in The Hague, al Mahdi had expressed a willingness to cooperate with investigators and, ultimately, to an unprecedented plea agreement. His cooperation helped to build a case against a more senior suspect, Al Hassan Ag Abdoul Aziz Ag Mohamed Ag Mahmoud, who was convicted in 2024 over war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Timbuktu.

Unfortunately, that is where ICC accountability for atrocities committed in Mali ended. Moreover, the strategic thinking of this period has seemingly reverted to a preference for building cases that, first and foremost, emphasize the most senior and powerful figures in a given context. Without doubt, the likes of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, senior Taliban leaders, and Russia’s Vladimir Putin deserve to be targeted for prosecution for their responsibility over a growing litany of international crimes. But the challenges the ICC faces today also mean that it is time to re-ignite a conversation about strategic practices in the Office of the Prosecutor. Candidates, will therefore hopefully be asked to expound on their ideas and experience in employing strategic thinking to bring atrocity perpetrators to account.

Continuity or change?

The ICC’s history suggests that there are times when continuity is desired and others when the preference is to usher in change. Continuity was the theme when Bensouda – who had previously been Deputy Prosecutor under Moreno-Ocampo – became chief Prosecutor. A desire for change was evident when Khan was chosen as chief Prosecutor in 2021. If the pattern holds, the next chief Prosecutor should represent continuity over change.

Whatever one thinks of the last few years and the multiple crises affecting the ICC, including the departure and removal of Khan as Prosecutor by the Assembly of States Parties, a great deal of care is needed to engender trust and healing inside of the institution. A healthy court cannot operate at its best with an ailing Office of the Prosecutor. 

Many will look outside of the ICC for possible ‘big names’ to run for Prosecutor, but it is hard to imagine how trust and healing can occur from anywhere but within the Court. Investigators and prosecutors need to believe that the person running the office not only has the best interests of the Court and affected communities in mind, but the best interests of staff in their heart. It is, quite frankly, difficult to fathom how the Office of the Prosecutor can navigate the next few years without full-buy-in from its best staff.

Whether they come from within the Court or from beyond it, whoever emerges as the chief Prosecutor must be a person of incredibly high integrity who engenders trust and who genuinely cares about people who are tasked with often-thankless jobs at a stressful and precarious time. The next Prosecutor must thus inspire those inside of the institution as much as they do people outside of it.

Personality: No Heroes Wanted

The ICC doesn’t need heroes – those who, by weight of their persona, personality or brilliance, believe that they can guide or save the institution alone. The Court needs someone whose sleeves are already rolled up, not someone who imagines themselves striding in with a cape. It needs someone who understands their limitations and knows how overcome them with the skills of those around them. It needs a person who makes people around them want to be better.

The next Prosecutor might therefore be someone who has never had the ego to want the job, but who is devoted to serving the interests of a cause and a court that is so much more important than any one person. Related to the above, the Court needs a Prosecutor who can make the Office of the Prosecutor function, coherently, strategically, and courageously, as a team. The chief Prosecutor’s mandate is of outsized importance, but they can only go so far as the people around them are willing to go with them. 

To be clear: this doesn’t mean that the ICC Prosecutor needs to be liked by everyone around them. They can’t be and won’t be. But having the respect of people in their office is equally, if not more, important than having the respect of the Court’s member-states. Through the election process, it would thus be welcome to see candidates asked about how they treat others, how they relate to colleagues, and how they will demonstrate care for their staff. The greatness of the next Prosecutor should be measured, in part, by what that their colleagues have achieved thanks to their leadership, professionalism, and persona.

Talking Justice: Effective Communication

People genuinely believe in the ICC. In my experience, they do so even when the Court has repeatedly disappointed them, misunderstood their needs, and even appeared to use them. That resilient sense of hope must be met with compassion and consistently-communicated care.

The ICC Prosecutor is the most visible face of an international court and an international organization. They need to be both at the same time, without sacrificing either their legal professionalism or political relevance. Being a lawyer in a political world and a political operator in an active court is why effective communication is so paramount for the Prosecutor.

With the challenges facing the ICC, it is essential that the next Prosecutor be able to expound persuasively upon the Court’s work and its mission. They must defend the court yet not be defensive, promote the court yet not pander. They need to be able – and constantly willing – to actively listen to a diversity of voices, and often divergent and seemingly incompatible views. This is no easy task, does not come naturally to most, and has always often been a challenge for ICC prosecutors.

Communicating to the Court’s various constituencies – the diplomatic world, civil society spaces, affected communities, and the millions who give a hoot about the ICC because of its underlying mission – has too often been viewed in begrudging terms by legal authorities at the Court. But effective communication is how trust is built, how connections are deepened, and how respect is demonstrated. It is how a Prosecutor can build the confidence of those inside the Court as well as those who receive their message. Many people, including citizens in states attacking the ICC and withdrawing from the Court, still support the institution and want to believe in its cause. They need a Prosecutor who can speak to them.

A final word (for now), on courage 

Maya Angelou once said that “courage is the most important of all virtues, because without courage you can’t practice any other virtue consistently.” 

To say that the next chief Prosecutor requires courage verges on the banal. But it is the most important trait they must embody, precisely because courage ties together all other virtues. The next Prosecutor must engender resilience and trust in others, lead and do so smartly, and recognize, as Mark Twain said, that courage isn’t the absence of fear but its mastery. 

Courage today is a form of resistance. The ICC is far from perfect, but it is also a canary in the coal mine; if the Court is allowed to die, much more will go down with it. The defence of the Court is, in so many ways, a frontline of defence of a world in which rules and decency still matter.

The next Prosecutor must bravely forge ahead, protect the institution, and resist persistent attempts to destroy it.