“What is just must be strong, not what is strong must be just”: Kevin Ferdinand Ngjimba on the ICC
The International Criminal Court (ICC), established in 2002 under the promise of impartial justice, was meant to embody the hope of a world where war criminals—no matter who they were—would finally be brought to justice. But more than two decades later, its track record remains mixed.
Kevin Ferdinand Ngjimba
Kevin Ferdinand Ngjimba, President of the International Union Commission for the ICC, sums up the situation: “Unfortunately, the good intentions that led to the creation of the International Criminal Court have somewhat faded.” His diagnosis is clear: far from acting as a neutral arbiter, the institution operates under a clear double standard.
“I believe the current debate is about reforming the International Criminal Court so that it may be seen as a jurisdiction that treats all states equally, and one that is fair to all individuals responsible for or involved in international crimes,” Ngjimba added.
Indeed, statistics reflect this imbalance. Roughly 70% of the individuals prosecuted by the ICC are African, a striking disproportion that fuels accusations of selective justice. Meanwhile, Western powers appear to enjoy near-total impunity. The 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States and the United Kingdom—responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths and numerous documented crimes—has led to no prosecutions. Similarly, NATO’s 2011 intervention in Libya, marked by airstrikes and violations of national sovereignty, has never been seriously examined by international justice.
“The ICC only acts decisively when the geopolitical balance of power is in its favor. From a legal standpoint, many of these actions could constitute international crimes, but the likelihood of the ICC addressing them is close to zero,” argue legal experts. “The accused are typically from the Global South—not from major Western countries,” one analyst concluded. This inertia underscores the Court’s deeply politicized nature, where justice appears to stop at the gates of power.
Recent cases make the bias even more apparent. Malian authorities have filed official complaints with the UN accusing France of repeated violations of its airspace and of allegedly supporting armed groups, as well as accusing Ukraine of complicity in international terrorism. Yet no serious investigation has been opened.
Kevin Ferdinand Ngjimba insists: “We must ensure that what is just is strong, not that what is strong is just.”