The architecture of international criminal justice is facing an unprecedented upheaval. The global stage has entered a phase of systemic cynicism where ideological extremes converge. This follows the US administration’s announcement of a frontal offensive to dismantle the International Criminal Court (ICC), followed by the decision of Venezuela’s de facto government to sever ties with the Hague-based tribunal. This de facto alliance between Washington and Caracas not only fractures the international legal order but also leaves thousands of victims utterly exposed, watching their hopes for justice sacrificed on the altar of realpolitik.
The ICC crisis deepened critically after the dismissal of Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, removed from his post by the Assembly of States Parties amid accusations of sexual assault. His departure decapitates the prosecuting body at the most vulnerable moment in its history. Taking advantage of this leadership vacuum and the institutional scandal, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio intensified the pressure by publicly celebrating Venezuela’s withdrawal from the court. Rubio, consistent with his campaign to discredit the ICC “brick by brick,” praised Caracas’s stance, labeling the court a “corrupt,” “useless,” and illegitimate body. Washington’s applause for a historically antagonistic regime reveals that, for current US geopolitics, the absolute priority is the dismantling of the Rome Statute and, more broadly, multilateralism. This attitude is not surprising, given that US civilian and military officials have moved to embrace Diosdado Cabello, against whom a $25 million reward remains in place—one of only two active rewards of that amount, along with Dawood Ibrahi, a kingpin of the Indian mafia.
Venezuela’s withdrawal from the ICC does not have immediate effects. A year must pass before the withdrawal takes effect, and it has no impact on ongoing investigations. Hungary had denounced the Rome Statute, but the decision was reversed once Viktor Orbán’s government gave way to Péter Magyar. Therefore, Venezuela’s withdrawal would also be reversible if the opposition, led by María Corina Machado, manages to come to power. However, for now, that possibility lacks any real basis. Amid this institutional retreat, Machado has not commented on the matter, a silence that seems to reflect the realignment and general bewilderment of democratic forces in the face of the new framework of relations dictated by Washington.
The international community’s reaction has been one of outright rejections. A bloc of 79 member countries signed a joint declaration of support for the ICC, attempting to erect a democratic bulwark against the dismantling of the court. Simultaneously, the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela (FFM Venezuela) categorically rejected the Chavista announcement. United Nations experts denounced the Rodríguez administration’s withdrawal as “coming at a critical moment” and constituting a clumsy attempt to “circumvent international mechanisms designed to promote accountability.” The UN noted that investigations into torture and extrajudicial killings do not have a statute of limitations and that withdrawal takes a year to take effect.
Meanwhile, Venezuelan citizens are seeking alternative avenues within national judicial systems to combat impunity. One example is the recent lawsuit filed by Venezuelan citizens against the US airlines CSI and GlobalX, companies that billed millions of dollars for contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for deportation flights. The plaintiffs were deported to CECOT in El Salvador, where they suffered severe torture. This legal action demonstrates that victims are willing to pursue not only the direct perpetrators but also corporate accomplices who act in flagrant violation of international law.
The current scenario leaves a bleak conclusion for Venezuela’s future: with the United States and the Chavista regime aligned against international justice, any real incentive for a transition to democracy or a credible transitional justice mechanism vanishes.
The paradoxical convergence of interests between the US and the Chavista dictatorship threatens to nullify external legal checks and balances. While macroeconomics and transactional diplomacy guide the new government agendas, the number of victims on the ground continues to rise. Their expectations for justice have not diminished; on the contrary, faced with the abandonment of official courts, they will turn to creative universal litigation and civil resistance.
Faced with the systemic collapse caused by the geopolitical pincer movement of Washington and Caracas, the international community must abandon declarative diplomacy and adopt a strategy of judicial resistance and the strangulation of impunity through immediate measures that include activating Universal Jurisdiction in National Courts, financially protecting the ICC to mitigate the foreseeable effects of the sanctions the US intends to impose, and maintaining pressure through special UN mechanisms such as the Fact-Finding Mission for Venezuela so that it continues to gather evidence and testimonies from victims, ensuring that the cases remain active even if Caracas formalizes its withdrawal from the court.