Namibia Confirms US Pressure to Quit the International Criminal Court

NAMIBIA · GEOPOLITICS

Namibia has confirmed what was until now only reported: the United States has formally contacted Windhoek as part of a lobbying drive to get African countries to leave the International Criminal Court. The government’s answer, for now, is no.

“Yes, the ministry has received communication”

The confirmation came from Ndiitah Nghipondoka-Robiati, acting executive director of the Ministry of International Relations and Trade, in comments to The Namibian published on Tuesday. She did not disclose the contents of the US communication, and would not say whether Washington had directly asked Namibia to withdraw.

What she did say amounted to a restatement of Namibia’s position: the country remains a state party to the Rome Statute, is committed to international law, multilateralism and the independence of international judicial institutions, and believes differences over the court are “best addressed through established legal, diplomatic and multilateral channels”. She acknowledged that the US is not a state party and has longstanding concerns about the court’s jurisdiction over nationals of non-member states.

What the ICC is, and why Washington wants it weakened

The International Criminal Court is a permanent tribunal in The Hague created by the 1998 Rome Statute to try individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression. Its 125 member states accept its jurisdiction as a court of last resort, stepping in only when national courts cannot or will not act. The United States never ratified the treaty.

The current standoff escalated in July, when Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a campaign to “dismantle the ICC — brick by brick, if necessary”, accusing the court of waging “war against our country” through international law. The drive follows the court’s November 2024 arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant over the Gaza war, and its still-open investigation into US personnel in Afghanistan. Washington has already sanctioned at least 11 court officials, including judges and prosecutors, freezing their access to banks and travel.

A Le Monde investigation reported in August that US pressure on African states includes ultimatums — Uganda received a letter in late July warning of “consequences” if it stayed — and hinted threats to security cooperation and aid. Chad announced its withdrawal in July, following Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso last year; the US Bureau of African Affairs publicly welcomed Chad’s move and called on more of the court’s members to follow.

Windhoek’s own withdrawal debate

The US approach lands in a country that already has a live domestic debate on the question. Job Amupanda, leader of the Affirmative Repositioning movement, tabled a motion in the National Assembly last year calling for withdrawal, arguing the court has become a tool of Western interests against Africa. He says the motion could be dealt with by October if the ruling Swapo party stops delaying parliamentary business — and insists Washington has nothing to do with it. “We don’t take instructions from the US,” he said.

Others read the moment as dangerous. McHenry Venaani, leader of the Popular Democratic Movement, warned that Namibia should not be dictated to by any foreign power: “Every nation must always take decisions on its own moral conscience and never be coerced.” Former ambassador Pius Dunaiski described a Rubio-led global campaign in which US embassies press governments to leave the court, backed by financial assistance and diplomatic leverage, and urged Windhoek to consult its Southern African partners and the African Union before moving.

Africa’s complicated history with the court

The African Union has long accused the ICC of selective justice for focusing on African leaders, and in 2017 Namibia’s then foreign minister — now president — Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah backed a collective African position on withdrawal while keeping Namibia inside the court. Her predecessor Hage Geingob once quipped that Namibia would stay if the US joined. Dunaiski notes that the Netanyahu warrant changed perceptions in parts of Africa, with some governments now viewing the court more favourably.

Namibia’s constitution, Article 96 of which commits the country to international law and peaceful cooperation, gives the government formal ground to resist pressure either way. What to watch: whether the Amupanda motion is scheduled in October; whether the US message’s contents leak; and whether other Southern African states confirm similar approaches, which would turn scattered reports into a documented regional campaign.

This report is based on The Namibian’s interview with the Ministry of International Relations and Trade and Namibian political figures; the US State Department’s July announcement and Secretary Rubio’s statements as reported by Reuters, CNN and Anadolu; Le Monde’s reporting on pressure on African states; and Associated Press reporting on Chad’s withdrawal.

Frequently asked questions

This article was produced by The Rio Times’ automated newsroom system. How we use AI · Report an error