TOKYO — Japan has pledged to continue supporting the International Criminal Court (ICC) after the United States imposed sanctions on the court’s Japanese president, Tomoko Akane, triggering rare public criticism of Washington from one of its closest Asian allies.
Tokyo described the U.S. action as “very unfortunate” and reaffirmed its commitment to the Hague-based court, even as questions grow over how strongly Japan will defend its national and the ICC against mounting American pressure.
The sanctions, announced by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, targeted Akane and senior ICC trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye of Senegal. Under the measures, assets within U.S. jurisdiction can be frozen, while access to parts of the U.S. financial system may be restricted. Washington argues that the ICC has overstepped its authority by pursuing cases involving nationals of countries that are not members of the court, including the United States and Israel.
Japan Faces a Delicate Test
Japan’s response is significant because Tokyo rarely publicly criticizes Washington and remains heavily reliant on the United States for its national security. Yet Japan is also a longtime supporter of the ICC and has stressed the court’s role in prosecuting genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi called the sanctions “very unfortunate,” saying Japan would continue communicating with the United States and other countries involved. The Foreign Ministry likewise said Tokyo would remain committed to strengthening the rule of law internationally.
But the carefully worded response has also drawn criticism from those who believe Japan should take stronger action to protect Akane and the independence of the international court.
The growing debate puts Tokyo in a difficult position: How far is Japan willing to go in defending the ICC when doing so risks friction with its most important ally?
ICC Calls Sanctions a ‘Flagrant Attack’
The ICC strongly condemned Washington’s latest move, describing the sanctions as a serious attack on the independence of an international judicial institution and warning that pressure on judges and prosecutors could weaken the broader international legal order.
The latest designations are part of a wider U.S. campaign against the court. According to the ICC, the Trump administration has sanctioned numerous court officials, including judges and prosecutors, escalating concerns that financial restrictions and other punitive measures could disrupt the tribunal’s work.
The United Nations has also expressed concern. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said through a spokesperson that the ICC is a key pillar of international criminal justice, despite being institutionally separate from the United Nations.
International Support Grows — But So Does the Pressure
Japan is not alone in opposing the sanctions. The Netherlands, which hosts the ICC in The Hague, has also voiced support for the court and its independence. The dispute has widened the gap between Washington and several of its traditional partners over the future of international justice.
The sanctions have renewed scrutiny of the practical consequences for those targeted. Restrictions linked to the U.S. financial system can create complications that extend beyond American borders because of the global reach of U.S.-connected banking and financial services.
Meanwhile, U.S. human rights organizations have challenged the broader sanctions policy in court, arguing that it can restrict advocacy and engagement related to international accountability efforts.
Why This Matters for the Philippines
For countries like the Philippines, the dispute is closely watched because it highlights a larger question: Can international institutions operate independently when powerful governments use economic and diplomatic pressure against their officials?
The ICC remains a major institution in the global justice system, and its investigations and decisions continue to generate intense political debate across different countries and conflicts. The confrontation between Washington and the court now raises broader concerns about the future ability of international prosecutors and judges to pursue cases without fear of retaliation.
For Japan, however, the issue has become even more personal.
Its own national now leads the world’s only permanent international criminal court — and she is directly in the crossfire of a confrontation between Washington and the institution Tokyo has long supported.
Japan has made its position clear: it still backs the ICC. The bigger question is whether words of support will be enough as pressure on the court intensifies.
Leave a Reply