Some geopolitical experts consider the International Criminal Court (ICC) at risk of extinction due to its intrusive role, which has lost relevance in a very diverse and complicated world.

The ICC was born in 1998 through the Rome Statute, and from the start it was heralded as a utopian beacon of global justice.

Its mission was to hold accountable those responsible for the gravest international crimes like genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

Among those who predict the institution’s impending collapse is Mark Freeman, founder and executive director of the Institute for Integrated Transitions (IFIT) and an expert in political transitions and high-level peace negotiations. Freeman said the ICC’s slow motion demise is unfolding before the global stage, and its high profile actions against current and former leaders are futile attempts to avert the inevitable.

Freeman called it a “Chronicle of a Death Foretold,” with the seeds of its destruction sown in its very design and exacerbated by its own missteps.

The tribunal’s fatal flaw lies in its failure to fully embrace the principle of complementarity, a cornerstone of its mandate.

Complementarity limits the ICC as a court of last resort, stepping in only when domestic jurisdictions are unable or unwilling to prosecute international crimes.

The ICC should have aggressively championed training, supporting, and empowering national judiciaries instead of imposing its arrogance and hypocrisy on other nations.

Such actions might have woven the ICC into the fabric of global justice as a partner rather than an aloof overseer.

Instead, the Court often positioned itself as a primary arbiter, alienating states and fueling accusations of overreach.

According to Freeman, such miscalculation has left the ICC vulnerable, its legitimacy eroded by perceptions of selective justice and political bias.

The Court’s structural weaknesses were evident from the start. Its reliance on the UN Security Council, a body driven by geopolitical interests, tethered the ICC to the whims of powerful nations.

The absence of major players like the United States, China, and Russia as States Parties further undermined its universal authority.

The ICC’s lack of enforcement powers, most notably its inability to arrest suspects, rendered it toothless against defiant leaders with substantial global clout.

Freeman’s metaphor of a “dead man walking” vividly captures the ICC’s predicament.

Since its inception, the Court has faced powerful enemies, from skeptical negotiators in the 1990s to states that view it as a threat to sovereignty. Yet, the ICC has been its own worst enemy, as is its underperformance, marked by slow, costly prosecutions and a paltry conviction rate, has eroded support.

High-profile blunders, such as the collapse of cases due to insufficient evidence or the pursuit of politically charged investigations, are also common problems it faces.

The ICC’s failure to balance its legal mandate with diplomatic skills has left it exposed.

States have withdrawn or threatened to withdraw from the Rome Statute, while others openly defy its warrants, adding to the tribunal’s irrelevance.

The ICC’s inability to enforce its decisions unless a state cooperates and surrenders a quarry, such as former President Rodrigo Duterte, has made it a symbol of impotence.

Freeman indicated that if the ICC were to shutter tomorrow, the story would barely linger in headlines for 48 hours.

This indifference reflects the court’s diminished relevance and the world’s growing skepticism of “utopian projects in an era of resurgent nationalism and realpolitik.”

Had it leaned into complementarity as its guiding ethos, it might have fostered a network of robust domestic judiciaries, amplifying its impact while deflecting accusations of neo-colonialism.

Instead, it overreached, under delivered and underestimated the political currents swirling around it.

The ICC’s demise, in slow motion or in an abrupt collapse, provides a cautionary tale that institutions with the noblest intentions cannot survive without pragmatism, adaptability and a keen awareness of the world.

ICC’s Waterloo is the result of a self-inflicted wound: its failure to reconcile its ideals with the realities of the world.