News Made Clear · Loading…
News Made Clear · Loading…

Lawmakers renewed calls for EU action as the International Criminal Court faces US sanctions. A temporary licence keeps many transactions possible, but the court is already on Washington’s sanctions list.
Review information is loading.
MEPs from several political groups pressed the European Commission to act against US sanctions on the International Criminal Court during a debate in Strasbourg on Tuesday. Their call centred on the EU’s blocking statute, but the debate did not activate it. Reports by ANP and EFE described support across political groups, rather than a counted vote. [1] [6]
The question is urgent for the court, which is based in The Hague. The US Treasury placed the ICC itself on its sanctions list on 9 October, while issuing a licence that permits certain transactions needed to maintain or wind down its operations until 7 April 2027. The six-month breathing space does not mean the court’s listing has been postponed. [3] [4]
Dutch MEP Raquel García Hermida-van der Walle urged preparations for emergency measures, according to EFE. ANP reported that Dirk Gotink argued for action within days rather than months, while Tineke Strik said quiet diplomacy had failed to stop President Donald Trump. Not everyone agreed: PVV MEP Mieke Andriese argued that the EU should adopt the US sanctions instead. [6] [1]
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told MEPs that work was being done on the blocking statute as one possible response, but said it would need careful preparation. She also urged companies not to stop serving the court during the transition period. [2]
Applying the existing statute to these sanctions would require the Commission to amend its annex. It is designed to prevent EU operators from complying with specified foreign sanctions, but the European Parliament’s research service warns that it cannot shield businesses from consequences such as losing access to US markets or finance. Parliament had already backed adding the ICC sanctions to the statute in resolutions in 2025 and 2026. [5]
7 listed sources · explore evidence, limitations and provenance.
Sign in to give this article a thumbs up or down.
Private test discussion. Comments are readers’ views and are not yet automatically fact-checked. Editing is available for 60 seconds after posting.
Ask your question with @newsmadeclear or @nmc. You may receive 5 starter credits once after checks on your confirmed email and browser. The offer is once per person; extra accounts do not entitle you to another bonus. There is no monthly refill. Previous balances remain. A question costs 1 credit, including additional research you permit. A source you provide that demonstrably improves the article earns 5 credits. If your question helps Astra find the missing source and improve the article, you receive 1 credit back.
Sign in with a confirmed reader account and choose a username to read comments and participate.
Sorting applies to top-level comments; replies remain oldest first. New comments and likes can change the order. Refresh for the current ranking.
Loading comments…
Interested in advertising with News Made Clear? Explore our pilot.
EU foreign ministers chose to pursue talks with Washington at a meeting on 12 October, when Belgium lacked support for tougher action, NOS reported. Kallas said EU leaders had since called on the Commission to take appropriate steps to protect the court and help EU companies continue serving it. Whether those steps will include applying the blocking statute remains undecided. [7] [2]