Can international criminal justice deliver accountability for gender persecution under de facto regimes? Examine with reference to Afghanistan.

Persecution on gender grounds is a crime against humanity under Article 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute. In July 2025, the ICC issued its first warrants on this charge, against Taliban Supreme Leader Akhundzada and Chief Justice Haqqani [1]. International criminal justice can therefore name and condemn the crime. Turning that into accountability (arrest, trial and redress) under a de facto regime is far harder.

What international criminal justice can deliver

• Jurisdiction without recognition: Afghanistan has been a State Party since 2003. The Taliban's rejection of the court does not remove its jurisdiction.
• Legal norm-building: the Chamber read "gender" beyond biological sex. It also unsealed four warrants, extending the case to Taliban education ministers [2].
• Evidence from the public record: the Taliban's discriminatory decrees are public. So this strand survives, while the strand on foreign forces was dropped for "significant limitations" in securing evidence [3].
• Stigma and deterrence: the accused risk arrest in any member state. This limits their travel and their regime's search for legitimacy.

Limits under a de facto regime

• No enforcement arm: the ICC has no police of its own, and the accused remain at large [4].
• Complementarity fails: Article 17 relies on national courts. In Afghanistan, the accused are the judiciary.
• Selective justice: the probe now covers only the Taliban [3]. This feeds the charge that the court prosecutes weak actors while powerful states escape.
• An institution under siege: the court and 13 current and former staff are under U.S. sanctions [3]. The UN Secretary-General called this "a serious blow" to international criminal justice [5].
• Victims' remedy: without trials there are no reparations, so Afghan women get recognition but not relief.

Way forward

• Trials under universal jurisdiction in national courts, which let a state try grave crimes committed anywhere.
• Linking ICC warrants to UN travel-ban and sanctions regimes.
• States Parties shielding the court's operations (banking, IT, staff) from sanctions [5].
• Preserving victims' testimony for future trials.

International criminal justice cannot yet deliver accountability against a de facto regime, but it can secure it for later. It records the crimes, sets the legal standard and isolates the accused. With state cooperation and even-handed application, the Afghanistan warrants can advance SDG 5 (gender equality) and SDG 16 (justice and strong institutions).