The government of Chad has announced its withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC), citing an effectiveness that remains inconsistent and geographically skewed. In an official statement released on Monday, the spokesperson for the Chadian government outlined the reasons behind this decision, emphasizing the court’s limited impact since its establishment in 2002.

According to N’Djamena, the ICC has opened thirteen investigations to date, with nine focused exclusively on African nations. The remaining four, spanning other regions, have reportedly made little progress. The statement also highlighted that only seven individuals remain in custody, six of whom are tied to African cases.

«This decision follows a thorough review of the ICC’s operations and its uneven track record,» the government noted, adding that the court’s activities have disproportionately targeted the African continent.

U.S. pressure and Chadian response

The move comes after a U.S. official urged Chad to reconsider its ICC membership during a phone call with the Chadian foreign minister. The American side expressed concerns over the court’s performance and suggested a reassessment of Chad’s adherence to the Rome Statute.

However, Chad’s Foreign Minister, Abdoulaye Sabre Fadoul, clarified that the withdrawal was not a direct response to U.S. demands. «This is not a decision made at the request of the Americans,» he stated in an interview.

Sudan conflict and ICC scrutiny

Chad’s decision arrives at a critical juncture, as the country faces allegations of facilitating arms shipments from the United Arab Emirates to Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF). These paramilitary groups have been engaged in a brutal civil war against the Sudanese army since April 2023, with both sides accused of war crimes, including indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas.

French lawyer Vincent Brengarth, who filed a complaint in 2025 on behalf of NGOs regarding alleged international crimes linked to arms trafficking, expressed concerns that Chad’s withdrawal could undermine ongoing justice efforts. «This decision weakens the global framework for prosecuting grave crimes and risks allowing perpetrators to evade accountability,» he warned.