ICC separates Taliban probe from US case as Afghan women's fate stays uncertain

By Aleksandar Brezar Published on 20/08/2026 - 11:44 GMT+2 Share Comments Add Euronews on Google Share Facebook Twitter Flipboard Send Reddit Linkedin Messenger Telegram VK Bluesky Threads Whatsapp ICC judges reportedly ordered prosecutors to open a standalone investigation into Taliban persecution of women, separating it from the probe that also covered alleged US crimes in Afghanistan. Afghan rights advocates warned the split risked undermining comprehensive justice. Five years after Afghanistan fell into the hands of the Taliban as they captured Kabul, the International Criminal Court has reportedly split its investigation of Taliban crimes from the broader Afghanistan probe in a move that could ease pressure from Washington on the court. ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT According to Middle East Eye, judges at the ICC's Pre-Trial Chamber II have ordered prosecutors to open a standalone investigation into alleged Taliban persecution of women, separating it from the court's long-running Afghanistan investigation, which also covered alleged crimes by US personnel. The Chamber reportedly found that Taliban conduct since 2021 is "materially different" from the conduct the original investigation was authorised to examine, and directed prosecutors to open a standalone inquiry. The ICC's Office of the Prosecutor would neither confirm nor deny the decision to Euronews, but it did indicate that the Taliban are the core concern of its probe. “The investigation is focused on the Taliban leadership and their alleged crimes of persecuting women and political opponents, including the deprivation of fundamental rights, systematic arrests and torture,” a spokesperson said. "The Office of the Prosecutor is unable to provide further comment on the investigation, or on the existence or non-existence of any alleged Court filing which is not public," the spokesperson added. ‘Deeply troubling’ Shaharzad Akbar, former head of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and now a fellow at Oxford's Wolfson College, did not mince words on the split. "Any selective justice is deeply troubling," Akbar told Euronews. "It is also alarming to hear the US's bullying, intimidation and attacks on the court are influencing decisions made about investigations." Akbar said Afghan civil society groups have "repeatedly asked the ICC for comprehensive investigations about all allegations that fall within its mandate," including allegations against US forces, and described Washington's conduct toward the court throughout the investigation as "appalling and shameful”. FILE: US Special Forces soldier takes cover as two Chinook Ch-47 helicopters come in for a landing with supplies in Afghanistan, 16 September 2009 AP Photo The allegations against US personnel in Afghanistan relate primarily to the documented abuse of detainees at CIA detention facilities there, including the Salt Pit black site north of Kabul, and the conduct of US military interrogators. The US Senate Intelligence Committee's 2014 report on the CIA's detention and interrogation programme found that detainees were subjected to waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other methods that constitute degradation and torture. The next day, the US Justice Department announced it would not open any new criminal investigations as a result of its findings. It also stated that if any foreign government issued an arrest warrant for a US official in connection with the programme, it would not enforce it. No US government has ever acknowledged wrongdoing by US military or CIA personnel in Afghanistan. During US President Donald Trump's first term, the White House applauded an early ICC ruling that declined to open a formal investigation into US personnel’s actions in Afghanistan, calling it "a major international victory" for "patriots”. The decision was later repealed. Why were the two bundled together to begin with? Unlike other international tribunals, the ICC does not separate its investigations by belligerents in a conflict. It probes what it calls a "situation” defined by territory and time period. Afghanistan ratified the Rome Statute in 2003, giving the court jurisdiction over crimes committed on Afghan soil from that date, regardless of who committed them. When the Appeals Chamber authorised a formal investigation in 2020, it covered the Taliban and its affiliate the Haqqani network, the so-called Islamic State-Khorasan Province group (ISIS-K), Afghan government forces, and US military and CIA personnel, all under a single investigative umbrella. FILE: The International Criminal Court, or ICC, is seen in The Hague, 7 November 2019 AP Photo In 2021, then-prosecutor Karim Khan deprioritised the part of the investigation concerning US conduct, choosing to focus the court’s resources on the Taliban and ISIS-K. But because the broader Afghanistan “situation” remained formally open, long-standing political pressure from Washington aimed at the investigation as a whole had the potential to affect the case against the Taliban simply because both were part of the same file. That pressure became even more pronounced ever since Trump returned to office in January 2025, with his administration doling out further sanctions within months against ICC officials tied to the Afghanistan and Palestine investigations. In December, diplomats told Middle East Eye that at the court's oversight meeting, Washington pressed for both investigations to be dropped entirely as a condition for lifting sanctions on ICC officials. The July 2025 warrants against Taliban leader Haibatullah Akhundzada and judiciary chief Abdul Hakim Haqqani for the crime against humanity of persecution of women and those perceived as allies of women on political grounds were issued amid those pressures. Washington to bring down the court? Last month, the US State Department announced plans for a campaign to “dismantle” the court and "systematically disable" its "ability to operate (and to) target American servicemen or officials, or otherwise threaten American sovereignty." It said actions could include increased restrictions and visa revocations, as well as travel bans on ICC personnel. On Tuesday, Washington announced further sanctions on ICC President Tomoko Akane and senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye, accusing them of "directly" engaging "in efforts by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute officials whose government has not consented to ICC jurisdiction." FILE: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio listens as President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable at the State Department in Washington, 7 August 2026 AP Photo US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who called the ICC a "corrupt and fatally politicised supranational court," added that it had "maliciously abused its authority and exceeded its mandate.” The court "repeatedly attempted to assert authority over nationals of the United States and other countries that have not consented to its jurisdiction or ratified the Rome Statute,” according to Rubio. Related ICC hits back after US announces fresh sanctions on senior court figures EU leaders rally behind International Criminal Court after fresh US sanctions The US has never ratified the Rome Statute. President Bill Clinton signed it in his final days in office in December 2000, but the administration of George W Bush formally withdrew the signature in May 2002 and notified the UN that the US did not intend to become a party. US Congress followed that same year with the American Service Members' Protection Act, which authorises the president to use military force to free any US citizen or allied national held by the ICC, legislation informally dubbed the "Hague Invasion Act”. ‘A gift to the Taliban’ Meanwhile, Washington’s actions after pulling out of Afghanistan have gone beyond abandonment, according to Akbar. "This context has emboldened criminal conduct and extensive violations across the world," she said. "This is a gift to regimes like the Taliban, who can continue with impunity in a context of failing global order and rule of law." “US’ disregard for international law and its attacks on the court embolden actors like Taliban and feed into their narratives about the Western bias of international tribunals." Afghanistan under the Taliban has turned into the most repressive country in the world for women, according to a UN assessment in March 2024. FILE: An Afghan woman takes part in a rally to mark International Women's Day, in Islamabad, Pakistan, 8 March 2023 AP Photo Since August 2021, the Taliban have issued more than 50 decrees systematically removing women from public life in Afghanistan. Girls are banned from education beyond the sixth grade, making Afghanistan the only country in the world where women are barred from secondary school on the basis of their gender. Women are prohibited from working in most jobs, including working for NGOs and UN agencies. Parks, gyms and public spaces are also off-limits. Further edicts were issued with the intent to persecute LGBTQ+ Afghans, empowering "morality police" to punish "moral crimes" and explicitly criminalising same-sex intimacy. Akbar said that Afghan women's rights groups, human rights investigators and survivors "have supported the ICC investigation every step of the way and have contributed to the process," while also demanding that the court widens its scope. What happens now? None of the Taliban officials under warrant are likely to ever be in custody: the group has complete control over Afghan territory since the US withdrawal in 2021 and has dismissed warrants as “hostility towards Islam”. Akhundzada has led the Taliban since 2016, when he succeeded Mullah Akhtar Mansour after his death in a US drone strike in Pakistan. Akhundzada has never appeared in public since taking on the role and is believed to operate solely from Kandahar in southern Afghanistan. He is ultimately responsible for the most restrictive edicts against women. Chief justice Haqqani has been the main architect of the judicial tools enforcing those edicts, including the return of public floggings and executions. Asked what the warrants have achieved, Akbar said that although valuable, they have had limited impact. "We welcomed the news of arrest warrants because it was a moment of justice and accountability after decades of impunity in Afghanistan," she said. "We hoped the warrants would also delay the trend of normalisation of the Taliban." "To change the situation in Afghanistan we need stronger political will from the region and the Western countries to engage on similar terms with the Taliban and demand reversals on bans and restrictions on the rights and freedoms of women and girls in Afghanistan,” Akbar concluded. Go to accessibility shortcuts Share Comments Add Euronews on Google Read more Taliban mark five-year anniversary of regaining power in Afghanistan More than 100 missing after Afghanistan floods Pakistani airstrikes kill 36 civilians in Afghanistan and wound 160, officials say Taliban Afghanistan United States ICC