Human Rights Watch is grateful for the opportunity to address the Committee on Budget and Finance of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute.
Human Rights Watch is not an auditor of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) finances, and we do not engage the Committee and the Assembly of States Parties to simply endorse the court’s proposed budget. Rather, we pursue two interconnected goals:
- To call states parties to account for the financial investment needed to make their commitment to this court a more effective reality; and
- Where we have expertise, to offer our observations to contribute to a budget process that achieves the resources necessary to support the full delivery of the court’s mandate.
In keeping with our longstanding commitment to support the ICC's mission, our engagement with the Committee is undertaken in service of sustaining the court as an essential vehicle to obtain justice for victims of serious international crimes and for the benefit of its mandate.
The Committee is assessing the court’s budget proposal for 2026 as the ICC is under extreme pressure in the form of coercive measures directed at court officials and others, cyber-attacks, and increased politicized opposition to its independent mandate. At the same time, the ICC and the fulfillment of its global mandate are more important and needed than ever.
The court’s budget request for next year is conservative; it focuses primarily on the institution’s resilience, its business continuity, and risk mitigation. In particular, the court acknowledges that sanctions imposed by the US government against certain court officials are having a financial impact and is requesting resources to mitigate operational, financial, and cybersecurity risks to preserve the court’s ability to carry out its mandate in full independence and impartiality.
At its last session, this Committee recognized the external challenges that the court is facing and underscored the importance of putting adequate measures in place to ensure institutional resilience and business continuity in the long term. It further acknowledged the potentially significant financial implications of such measures. The Committee should bring these considerations into its assessment of the court’s proposed budget for 2026.
This Committee also noted the need for increased flexibility in the management of resources to ensure the court is able to adequately and timely respond to emerging risks. We welcome the Committee’s approach and its openness to exploring further with the court what such increased flexibility could look like and what changes may be required to the current financial framework.
In our view, another important factor to consider when looking at the environment the court will be operating in — and the costs associated with it — is the financial pressure faced by many elements of the broad system for international justice. This includes the prospect of cuts in funding to other critical elements of the system, such as United Nations activities and support to nongovernmental organizations, on which the ICC depends. We recommend that the Committee consider requesting the court to analyze this issue and report publicly on the anticipated impact of these cuts on the court’s operations to better inform steps to address them.
Finally, we note the Assembly’s decision at its 23rd session to allow the Contingency Fund to be exceptionally used for additional costs related to sanctions — among others. We also note that the court informed the Committee that it may need to access the fund in 2025 “to meet unforeseen and unavoidable expenses,” related to US sanctions. In light of the current environmental uncertainty, we believe the Assembly should not only ensure the regular replenishment of the Contingency Fund but also increase the fund’s notional level to put the court on better footing to respond to major developments.
Thank you.
