Statement of the ASP President following the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings involving Prosecutor Karim Khan

The President of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) wishes to address recent developments concerning the completion of disciplinary proceedings involving Prosecutor Karim Khan following the 24 July 2026 decision of the Assembly of States. The Assembly by a majority of 82 States Parties found that Mr. Karim Khan committed serious misconduct and serious breach of duty and removed him from office under article 46 of the Rome Statute.

The President underscores that these disciplinary proceedings are not related to the conduct of investigations or proceedings before the Court and are without prejudice to the independence of the International Criminal Court.

In reaching its decision, the Bureau and the Assembly have fully respected the due process rights of the Prosecutor and accorded him considerable flexibility by granting additional protections to those specified under the legal framework.

Under the applicable legal framework, investigations into allegations of misconduct against elected officials and subsequent disciplinary proceedings before the Bureau and the Assembly are confidential in nature. This confidentiality serves a fundamental purpose: it safeguards the integrity of ongoing proceedings and protects the rights of all individuals involved, including the right of the subject to the protection of his or her reputation prior to a final determination. It also aims to ensure that disciplinary processes are conducted in a manner that upholds the dignity and privacy of all persons concerned.

Throughout the proceedings, the Presidency and the Bureau have remained bound by their obligation of confidentiality and have exercised restraint in responding to media reports or public speculation. Now that the disciplinary process has concluded before the Assembly, the President considers it appropriate to provide certain clarifications regarding the applicable procedures and decisions taken within the established legal framework.

First, the investigation conducted by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) found that there was evidence supporting the allegations of misconduct made by the victim and two other affected individuals.

Second, an ad hoc Panel of judicial experts was established by the Bureau in the context of a recommendation arising from the 2020 Independent Expert Review (IER), which was partially endorsed by the Assembly of States Parties, calling for the establishment of such panels to assist with legal characterization of investigative reports issued by investigators.

Third, the use of ad hoc Panels was subsequently adopted by the Assembly at its twenty-fourth session, in resolution ICC-ASP/24/Res.2, and forms part of the Court's legal framework.

Fourth, the mandate of the ad hoc Panel is advisory in nature. The Bureau, as the competent decision-making authority, retained responsibility for making determinations on the allegations.

Fifth, the report of the ad hoc Panel did not exonerate Prosecutor Khan. Rather, the report indicated that the Panel's mandate did not permit additional investigative steps or independent fact-finding, thereby limiting its ability to draw conclusions on the evidentiary record established by OIOS.

Sixth, unlike the Panel, the Bureau was not subject to limitations precluding it from drawing factual conclusions from the evidentiary record.

Seventh, in reaching its decision, the Bureau was guided by the Panel's legal assessment of the evidentiary record established by OIOS, and applied the applicable standard of proof required for disciplinary determinations.

Finally, the Bureau's decision that Prosecutor Khan engaged in serious misconduct and serious breach of duty was based on its assessment of the OIOS report, the underlying evidentiary material, and the advice of the ad hoc Panel, all within the legal framework governing allegations of misconduct against elected officials.

With the conclusion of the disciplinary process and the decision of the Assembly of States Parties, the matter is closed. The President reiterates her expectation that due respect be afforded to the privacy and dignity of all individuals involved.

In closing, the President expresses her deep appreciation to the Assembly of States Parties for their diligent consideration of this difficult matter and for the spirit of unity shown in upholding the integrity of the Court. She further acknowledges the dedication of the Court's staff who have continued to work tirelessly in the implementation of the Court's critical mandate during this prolonged period of uncertainty. While the Court may have more challenges ahead, the Assembly's navigation of this difficult matter, coupled with the dedication of the Court's staff and elected officials has demonstrated the resolve to continue to support the Court through difficult times and to ensure that it can discharge its critical mandate in the interests of the international community as a whole and victims of atrocity crimes the world over.

The Assembly of States Parties is the management oversight and legislative body of the International Criminal Court. It is comprised of representatives of States that have ratified or acceded to the Rome Statute. The President of the Assembly is H.E. Ms. Päivi Kaukoranta (Finland).

X: @PASPKaukoranta
For further information on the Assembly of States Parties, please e-mail [email protected]