The announcement by Chadian authorities of their decision to withdraw from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) marks a worrying setback for the fight against impunity for the most serious crimes and for victims’ rights. Chad’s commitment to international justice is called into question at a time when that justice is facing growing attacks and when state cooperation is more essential than ever.
N’Djamena, 12 August, 2026. On July 27, 2026, the Government of the Republic of Chad decided to withdraw from the Rome Statute of the ICC. The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Chadian League for Human Rights (LTDH), the Chadian Association for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (ATPDH), and the Public Interest Law Center (PILC) express their profound indignation and condemn this decision.
The Rome Statute does not replace national courts; it operates on the basis of complementarity, stepping in when national courts lack the capacity or willingness to investigate and prosecute the most serious crimes. Withdrawal does not strengthen the ability of national courts to deliver justice, it instead deprives victims of an alternative path to obtaining it. Chad’s withdrawal represents a further setback for the global fight against impunity and for victims’ rights, at a time when the Court is facing unprecedented attacks, including the U.S. government’s campaign aimed at dismantling the ICC.
Chad’s announcement does not, however, carry immediate legal consequences. Article 127 of the Rome Statute governs the effects of such a withdrawal: it only takes effect one year after written notification to the UN Secretary-General, in this case, on 27 July, 2027. Moreover, withdrawal does not release the state concerned from obligations incurred while it was a party to the Statute, including the obligation to cooperate with the Court on investigations and criminal proceedings already underway before the withdrawal takes effect, and it does not affect investigations or proceedings the Court had already opened before that date. Chad’s withdrawal, should it go forward, therefore cannot erase the past or prevent the Court from exercising jurisdiction over crimes committed before it takes effect.
Chad’s announcement comes amid a growing challenge to international criminal justice and the ICC. The three member states of the Alliance of Sahel States (Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger) recently gave notice of their withdrawal from the ICC. Those withdrawals will take effect on June 18, 2027 for Niger, and June 24, 2027 for Burkina Faso and Mali.
African states nonetheless played an essential role in creating the Court in 1998, ratifying the Rome Statute in large numbers and even referring certain domestic situations to the Court’s jurisdiction. That commitment gave victims of the most serious crimes an international ally when justice was not possible at the national level. Chad’s announced withdrawal runs counter to this history of African leadership, leaving victims with fewer means of obtaining justice.
While the ICC has in the past been criticized for the selectivity of the cases it opens and for what was seen as excessive focus on Africa, the Court has progressively worked to strengthen the universality of its mandate, expanding its reach well beyond the African continent, with ongoing investigations and cases in Afghanistan, Bangladesh/Myanmar, Palestine, Ukraine, Venezuela, and the Philippines. The recent arrest of former President Rodrigo Duterte showed that no region and no senior official is beyond the reach of justice. This universality strengthens the Court’s legitimacy but also makes it more vulnerable to political attacks.
The organisations call on Chadian authorities to reverse their decision to withdraw from the ICC and to reaffirm their commitment to the Rome Statute and to international justice. As Chad hosts several hundred thousand refugees from Darfur who suffered violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, this announcement sends an alarming signal to victims. Victims of the most serious international crimes must not be the first casualties of states’ political choices. When national courts are unable or unwilling to deliver justice, the ICC remains an essential mechanism of last resort to guarantee victims’ right to truth, justice, and reparation. At a time when serious human rights violations persist in many parts of the world, states should be strengthening international mechanisms against impunity, not distancing themselves from them.
FIDH, LTDH, ATPDH, and PILC reaffirm their determination to continue, alongside the whole of Chadian and international civil society, the fight against impunity for justice, victims’ dignity, and respect for human rights in Chad.
