Cambodia’s accession to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002, in the aftermath of the Khmer Rouge era, was initially seen as a step toward demonstrating a commitment to international justice and human rights. However, as the nation grapples with the long-term implications of this membership, it is vital to assess the political, diplomatic, and strategic dimensions of whether Cambodia should consider withdrawal from the ICC.
I. The Illusion of ICC Benefits: Prestige, Assistance, and Reality
Cambodia’s decision to join the ICC was largely driven by the desire to address lingering human rights concerns from the Khmer Rouge era and enhance its international reputation.
Membership was seen as a reaffirmation of its commitment to justice, briefly attracting financial support from Western nations. However, these benefits were short-lived, and the anticipated long-term advantages such as a strengthened global standing and sustained assistance, failed to materialize. True justice and national progress cannot rely on temporary external aid but must be built through internal resilience and self-reliance.
Moreover, while the ICC theoretically offers judicial support to its member states, Cambodia has seen little tangible assistance in tackling transnational crime. Despite fulfilling its financial obligations to the court and expressing willingness to cooperate, the expected legal and technical aid has remained elusive. The country’s legal system continues to evolve, but challenges persist, as reflected in its low ranking in the Transparency International’s 2024 report. Rather than relying on external institutions with uncertain support, Cambodia must focus on long-term judicial reforms and self-sufficiency to ensure fairness and justice for its citizens.
II. Threat to Sovereignty and Risk of External Interference
ASEAN countries emphasize the principle of non-interference and prioritize their domestic judicial systems, yet the ICC’s universal jurisdiction allows it to bypass national sovereignty and launch investigations. This creates a direct conflict with ASEAN’s core values. In Cambodia’s case, opposition groups have frequently sought support from international organizations to push for ICC investigations into alleged judicial corruption and human rights violations, often with the aim of provoking sanctions or political upheaval.
A recent example includes opposition figure Sam Rainsy’s claim that former Prime Minister Hun Sen could face trial at the ICC, similar to former Philippine President Duterte. Such statements, lacking any legal basis, serve only to incite unrest and challenge Cambodia’s judicial authority. By remaining a member of the ICC, Cambodia risks ceding part of its sovereignty, making it vulnerable to external interference. Given these concerns, the country must remain cautious of attempts by foreign and domestic actors to use the ICC as a tool to destabilize national security and political stability.
a. Inefficient Constraints and High Costs
The ICC faces challenges such as lengthy procedures and high costs, which are difficult to align with Cambodia’s need for swift resolution of social conflicts. Cambodia’s collaboration with the international judicial mechanism to establish the Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia (ECCC) is a case in point. It took 15 years and $330 million to conclude judgments on just three cases, raising questions about its efficiency. Similarly, the ICC, which also operates under an international judicial framework, undoubtedly shares these issues. Recently, the ICC conducted investigations in Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic. The average duration of these investigations exceeded 18 years, with specific costs unknown; however, the increased costs associated with the delays are inevitable. It is clear that the protracted ICC processes and exorbitant costs will provide no benefit to Cambodia; instead, they will only serve as further impediments.
b. The Trap of Politicization and the Double Standard of International Justice
The ICC is predominantly influenced by European and American nations, exhibiting a disparate application of justice. It is well-documented that a significant proportion of the ICC’s investigations are focused on African countries, while the efficiency in investigating cases in other regions is notably inefficient. For example, under pressure from the United States, the ICC has continuously shelved its investigation into crimes committed by U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan. This suggests that, to an extent, the ICC functions as a tool for Western countries to engage in geopolitical competition, and Cambodia’s involvement in it would be perilous. Double standards imply that the ICC is subject to the whims of European and American nations, and its disparate application of justice has tarnished the integrity of international justice. As a small nation, Cambodia must ensure its independence and neutrality.
One of the central criticisms of the ICC lies in its perceived selective application of justice, especially when considering its inability to arrest certain powerful figures like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin, compared to its action against former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. As Israel and Russia, both major political players, have not cooperated with the ICC. Israel does not recognize the court’s authority, and Russia, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has defied the court’s jurisdiction, rendering the ICC’s efforts ineffectual while the ICC has been able to take action against Duterte, who is accused of committing crimes against humanity related to his violent war on drugs in the Philippines.
To fall into this game among great powers would undoubtedly make Cambodia a victim and rob it of its right to sovereignty; therefore, it is imperative for Cambodia to avoid such entanglements.
III. Weighing ICC Withdrawal: Political, Diplomatic, and Strategic Considerations
a. Political Considerations:
Cambodia’s membership in the ICC has sparked debates over the erosion of national sovereignty, particularly as the ICC’s universal jurisdiction could interfere in domestic matters. There is a significant political risk that Cambodia, as a sovereign state, might be subjected to external pressure from international actors or opposition groups attempting to use the ICC for political gains.
The fear that such mechanisms could be used against the government under the guise of human rights violations or judicial corruption is a key concern for the ruling party, especially amid Cambodia’s internal political dynamics. Additionally, The ICC is often seen as a tool of Western influence, with a disproportionate focus on African nations and limited attention given to crimes committed by more powerful states, such as the U.S. and its allies. Cambodia, as a small and developing nation, risks becoming embroiled in international political struggles between great powers, particularly those centered on human rights and international law. Cambodia’s domestic political considerations, particularly the government’s desire to maintain stability and resist foreign interference, could lead to the decision to withdraw from the ICC to safeguard its sovereignty.
b. Diplomatic Considerations:
Cambodia’s membership in the ICC was initially aimed at improving its image on the world stage, especially in the aftermath of the Khmer Rouge. However, the tangible benefits in terms of international aid and support have been minimal. Cambodia may feel that it has not received sufficient diplomatic dividends from its continued membership in the ICC. Cambodia is part of ASEAN, which adheres to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of its member states. The ICC’s mandate could potentially conflict with ASEAN’s core principles, creating diplomatic friction with neighboring countries. If Cambodia were to withdraw from the ICC, it could position itself as a defender of ASEAN’s sovereignty principles, aligning more closely with regional norms.
c. Strategic Consideration:
The ICC’s protracted and expensive legal processes, evidenced by cases such as the Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia (ECCC), have demonstrated inefficiencies that may not align with Cambodia’s strategic needs. Cambodia could redirect the resources spent on ICC-related commitments into domestic initiatives, such as judicial reforms or strengthening its legal system to handle transnational crime. Withdrawing from the ICC would enable Cambodia to focus on self-improvement of its domestic legal framework. Recent efforts to address issues such as online fraud, led by Prime Minister Hun Manet’s establishment of a dedicated committee, highlight Cambodia’s potential to combat transnational crime through regional cooperation and domestic legislation rather than relying on external entities like the ICC.
IV. Reevaluating Cambodia’s ICC Membership
While Cambodia’s ICC membership once symbolized a commitment to international justice, its practical drawbacks have become increasingly evident. The court’s inefficiencies, selective enforcement, and susceptibility to geopolitical influence raise concerns about Cambodia’s judicial sovereignty and strategic interests. Moreover, the ICC’s failure to hold powerful leaders accountable while targeting smaller nations undermines its credibility. Redirecting resources from ICC membership toward domestic legal reforms and regional cooperation would yield more tangible benefits, strengthening Cambodia’s judiciary while avoiding external interference and political entanglements.
Cambodia’s strategic priorities—upholding sovereignty, minimizing external interference, and prioritizing national development—make ICC withdrawal a feasible option. By focusing on domestic legal reforms and regional cooperation, Cambodia can effectively address transnational crime without reliance on international judicial mechanisms. Prime Minister Hun Manet’s recent initiative to combat online fraud exemplifies the country’s commitment to strengthening its legal framework. Redirecting resources from ICC membership toward domestic judicial capacity and regional partnerships would better serve Cambodia’s long-term stability and prosperity.
The author is a Geopolitical and Security Analyst and Lecturer at the Institute for International Studies and Public Policy, Royal University of Phnom Penh. The views expressed here are the author’s own.
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.
