World

Venezuela to exit International Criminal Court, accusing it of ‘bias’

Al Jazeera · 2026-07-24

AI SUMMARY

• What happened: Venezuela has announced its decision to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), citing perceived bias against countries in the Global South. • Why it matters: This withdrawal reflects ongoing tensions between the Venezuelan government and international judicial bodies, raising concerns about the equitable application of international law and the ICC's credibility. • What to watch next: Monitor the implications of Venezuela's exit on its foreign relations, particularly with the United States and Israel, as well as the ICC's response to this development.

**Venezuela to Withdraw from International Criminal Court, Citing Bias**

*Published: July 24, 2026*

The Venezuelan government has announced its decision to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), alleging that the court exhibits a bias against nations in the Global South. This announcement was made public via a statement by Foreign Minister Felix Plasencia on social media, where he confirmed that the government had formally notified the United Nations of its "irrevocable" decision.

The withdrawal comes under the directive of interim President Delcy Rodriguez, who has been noted for her efforts to realign Venezuela's foreign policy, particularly in relation to the United States. Plasencia articulated concerns that the ICC's actions disproportionately target countries in Africa and Latin America, suggesting that this trend undermines the principles of equitable justice and self-determination for nations in the Global South.

“The Court’s actions reflect a demonstrated geographical bias, which has disproportionately concentrated its work on African and Latin American countries, to the detriment of the Global South,” Plasencia stated. He further criticized the international justice system for being manipulated to exacerbate inequalities among nations.

The ICC has been under scrutiny for its focus on alleged crimes committed by the Venezuelan government, particularly regarding the crackdown on anti-government protests in 2017. In December 2025, Venezuela’s National Assembly voted to revoke its commitments to the Rome Statute, which is the treaty that established the ICC.

Critics of the ICC have often pointed out that it appears to apply different standards to leaders from the Global South compared to those from Western nations. National Assembly President Jorge Rodriguez has previously labeled the court as an instrument of "American imperialism," reflecting a broader sentiment within the Venezuelan government regarding the court's legitimacy.

This announcement arrives at a time when Venezuela is reportedly seeking to strengthen its ties with the United States, particularly following a military operation in January that resulted in the abduction of former President Nicolas Maduro. The current geopolitical landscape has seen the U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio assert that the U.S. would work to "systematically disable" the ICC's operations regarding Venezuela.

Rubio has criticized the ICC, claiming that it is engaged in a form of warfare against Venezuela, utilizing legal mechanisms instead of military force. This criticism aligns with the broader stance of the U.S. government, particularly during the Trump administration, which sought to undermine the court through sanctions against its officials involved in investigations into U.S. actions.

The timing of Venezuela's withdrawal also coincides with discussions about the potential for re-establishing relations with Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been indicted by the ICC on charges related to alleged war crimes in Gaza, further complicating the international dynamics surrounding the court.

As Venezuela moves forward with its decision to exit the ICC, the implications for international law and the court's credibility remain to be seen. The Venezuelan government's stance highlights ongoing tensions between nations in the Global South and international judicial bodies, raising questions about the equitable application of international law.

Source: Al Jazeera
RELATED NEWS

More Stories

All News
World

Which matches and tournaments can football fans watch after the World Cup?

• What happened: Following the conclusion of the FIFA World Cup 2026, football fans will soon have the opportunity to watch various club and national team match...

World

IOC rejects human rights group’s complaint against Trump ally Infantino

• What happened: The International Olympic Committee (IOC) rejected a complaint from human rights group FairSquare against FIFA President Gianni Infantino, stat...

World

Zelensky tries to fix crisis over removal of defence minister and counts the cost

• What happened: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's decision to not re-appoint Mykhailo Fedorov as defence minister has led to ongoing protests and p...

World

Firefighters struggle to contain Madrid wildfires, as more than 140,000 evacuated in France and Spain

• What happened: Wildfires near Madrid have merged into a massive blaze, prompting the evacuation of at least 30,000 people as Spain declares a national emergen...

World

China, Philippine coastguard vessels clash in South China Sea

• What happened: A China Coast Guard vessel used a water cannon against Philippine government boats near Scarborough Shoal, escalating tensions in the disputed ...

World

Paramount agrees to pause Warner Bros deal while court case plays out

• What happened: Paramount Skydance has paused its $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery due to a legal challenge from a coalition of twelve states...