Tomoko Akane (Nagoya, Japan, 1956) was elected in 2024 by her colleagues as president of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Her term ends in 2027, at the same time that her statutory nine-year period as a judge expires in the only permanent institution that judges those most responsible for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. In August, the United States sanctioned her along with the Senegalese prosecutor Abdoulaye Seye. At this moment, for example, this magistrate cannot enter US territory and her credit card has been canceled. There are already 13 judges, prosecutors and one member of staff punished in this way by the Government of President Donald Trump, which considers the ICC a “corrupt and politicized organization” that threatens its sovereignty and attacks its main ally, Israel.
The United States is not one of its 125 member states and Washington believes that no world court can prevail over its own and its Constitution. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, has gone further by declaring that he intends to “dismantle it,” and is also putting pressure on the countries with which it maintains alliances to abandon it.
In addition, Akane was a member of the Preliminary Chamber in 2023 that issued the arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin and was also convicted in absentia by the Moscow courts. Your situation is unprecedented. The president of the TPI has responded to a questionnaire sent by EL PAÍS, in her first interview with a Western media since the announcement of the sanctions.
Ask. How do you face the punishment that the United States has imposed on you?
Answer. It is always shocking to see your name on the same list as traffickers and terrorists when you are a judge committed to defending the rule of law. Many of its effects have not yet materialized, but it is reasonable to expect that they will affect some aspects of my personal life. My credit card was suspended almost immediately. Other judges have suffered practical disruptions in their daily lives as a result of companies having stopped providing services to sanctioned people.
Since my high school years, I have been driven by a commitment to justice. At this critical time, as your president, I feel a personal responsibility to help protect the Court. Their independence and ability to provide justice to victims. I will continue to perform my duties and fulfill my mandate. I took an oath to do so and I stand by that commitment.
Q. Is the TPI facing its biggest challenge since it was created in 2002?
A. Nine of the 18 judges, the two deputy prosecutors, the former prosecutor and a member of staff have been subject to sanctions by the United States. Furthermore, nine current and former judges, including the entire ICC presidency, have been convicted in absentia by Russia [after issuing an arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin for his alleged responsibility in the forced deportation of Ukrainian minors], which has obvious implications for their personal safety. In total, two-thirds of the Court's judges are subject to coercive measures by some of the most powerful states in the world. It is an unprecedented situation in the history of the ICC. These attacks attest to the importance of impartiality in the work of this Court. Efforts to investigate and prosecute the most serious crimes under international law are met with resistance from those who prefer impunity to accountability.
Q. Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of the international rule of law?
A. These are deeply worrying times for international justice and for the rules-based international order. At the same time, it is encouraging to see how States, civil society organizations and citizens raise their voices in defense of International Law. These displays of solidarity are more important than ever.
The Court was not created by chance nor was it established overnight. Rome was not built in a day, and neither was the Rome Statute [text that underpins the work of the ICC]. The Tribunal emerged from the lessons of war, persecution and mass atrocities, and from the conviction of States that law and justice must prevail over force. Those values are as important as ever. It remains a young institution compared to legal systems built over centuries. But it is based on an idea whose time has come: no one is above the law.
Q. The crimes prosecuted by the ICC seem far away but they could occur anywhere. Can it continue to be the cornerstone of the global fight against impunity?
A. A permanent court is in place before crimes are committed. Its jurisdiction is known in advance and it applies the same law to everyone within its reach. This permanence is what allows a court to deter rather than simply react, and it is what makes the promise credible to people who would have no reason to expect that a court would ever be created for them.
I was once in a courtroom when a victim of sexual violence was asked why she had decided to testify. She responded: “I know that no one else can defend me, only justice, the judges (…) because what happened to me I wouldn't want it to happen to anyone else.” These victims remind us why this work is important and why it must continue. To make the promise of “never again” a reality. Sooner or later, History will call us all to account. “Where were you?” they will ask us. I call on States to defend and promote these fundamental principles of International Law, which are moral imperatives, and promote the pursuit of justice.
Q. What type of external collective action does the ICC need to address Washington's penalties?
A. We have received strong signals of support from States and we will continue to be in close contact with them to address the challenges of these measures, including political, legal, financial and operational issues. There is another form of collective action: cooperation. ICC decisions can only be enforced when States give effect to them, especially through the execution of arrest warrants. The pursuit of justice is a shared responsibility.
Q. How do sanctions affect victims?
A. I can assure you that they continue to occupy a central place in our procedures. They participate in trials through their legal representatives, ensuring that their opinions and concerns are heard throughout the process. Following a conviction, they may be entitled to compensation.
The trial against the former head of state of the Philippines [Rodrigo Duterte] is scheduled to begin in November, and another case related to serious crimes allegedly committed in a detention center in Libya [against former militia commander Khaled Mohamed Ali El Hisri] is expected to be opened next year. To date, the Tribunal has opened 18 investigations and contributed to accountability for serious crimes such as the recruitment and use of child soldiers, the destruction of cultural heritage, sexual violence or attacks against civilians.
Q. The United States claims that the Court is politicized and that it has Israel in its sights. Does the ICC violate the national sovereignty of its 125 State parties?
A. The mandate is to investigate and prosecute when States are unwilling or unable to do so. The Court complements national systems rather than replacing them. That does not constitute a violation of sovereignty. It is the exercise of sovereignty. The very creation of the ICC results from the exercise of sovereignty by States in a multilateral treaty. It is based on the shared conviction that the rule of law is the greatest protection against the abuse of power, and that accountability is essential. Judges do not choose the situations that are presented to them, nor do they choose the accused. We simply apply the law to the evidence in the cases we receive. That is what impartiality requires.
Q. During its early years, the ICC was criticized for focusing on Africa. There are now arrest warrants against Russian President Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the war in Gaza. What has happened?
A. Initially, several investigations arose from self-initiated referrals by African States or by the United Nations Security Council regarding conflicts in Africa. Over time, the work has expanded to cover all regions of the world. But our responsibility is not to respond to political debates, but to apply the law without regard to geography, nationality or political considerations.
Q. The Tribunal lacks its own police force and depends on international cooperation to execute its arrest warrants. Doesn't this undermine accountability?
