ICC Closes Sanctions Case, Probes Belarus Crimes
Ruling Reshapes Venezuela Crisis After Maduro; Shifts Legal Debate on Venezuela
The Hague: The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court on March 12 rejected Venezuela’s claim that United States sanctions amount to crimes against humanity, while opening a separate investigation into alleged deportation and persecution carried out by authorities in Belarus after a complaint from Lithuania. The decision closes a six-year legal effort by Caracas to challenge the legality of the sanctions regime before the Hague-based tribunal and comes at a time when Venezuela itself is undergoing a profound political upheaval.
The ruling concerns what was known at the Court as the “Situation in Venezuela II.” In February 2020, the government of Venezuela formally referred the matter to the ICC under Article 14 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, alleging that unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States since at least 2014 had produced severe humanitarian consequences. According to the referral, the restrictions had caused suffering on such a scale that they amounted to crimes against humanity, including murder, extermination, deportation, persecution and other inhumane acts against the civilian population.
After examining the material submitted during the preliminary examination, the Office of the Prosecutor concluded that the legal threshold required to open a criminal investigation had not been met. Under international criminal law, prosecutors must establish a reasonable basis to believe that alleged conduct directly caused the crimes in question and that those responsible acted with the necessary criminal intent.
The Office determined that the information available did not demonstrate a sufficiently clear causal relationship between the sanctions and the alleged crimes cited by Venezuela. It also found that the evidence did not establish the intent required for criminal liability under the Rome Statute. On that basis, the prosecutor concluded that there was no reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the Court’s jurisdiction had been committed through the sanctions regime.
The decision has been formally communicated to the Venezuelan authorities as well as to the Court’s ICC Pre‑Trial Chamber I. Under ICC procedure, Venezuela has a period of ninety days to request a judicial review of the prosecutor’s decision not to proceed with an investigation.
The ruling arrives against the backdrop of a dramatic political rupture in Venezuela. In early January 2026, United States special forces carried out an operation in Caracas that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and his transfer to the United States. Maduro was subsequently taken into U.S. custody to face federal charges linked to narcotics trafficking and related offences. The operation effectively ended his presidency and triggered a sudden shift in the country’s political landscape.
The capture of a sitting head of state by foreign forces provoked intense international debate. Critics described the operation as a breach of Venezuelan sovereignty and raised questions about its compatibility with international law governing the use of force between states. Supporters, however, argued that Maduro’s removal represented a decisive blow against transnational criminal networks and authoritarian rule.
Although the ICC ruling does not address the legality of the U.S. operation, it carries important diplomatic implications for Venezuela’s long-running confrontation with Washington. For years, the Maduro government had sought to frame U.S. sanctions as an international crime and pursued that argument through international legal forums. By concluding that the evidence does not support a criminal investigation, the ICC prosecutor has effectively closed that legal avenue.
The decision, therefore, weakens one of the central legal narratives advanced by Caracas during the years of escalating sanctions and economic isolation. At the same time, the Court emphasised that its finding does not imply an endorsement of the sanctions themselves, nor does it assess their political or humanitarian consequences beyond the narrow standards required for international criminal prosecution.
The prosecutor also stressed that the ruling applies only to the sanctions-related referral known as Venezuela II and has no bearing on a separate ongoing investigation at the ICC concerning alleged abuses by Venezuelan authorities. That investigation, commonly referred to as the “Situation in Venezuela I,” focuses on possible crimes against humanity committed since at least 2014, particularly in the context of detentions and actions by security forces during crackdowns on political dissent.
While the sanctions case has now been closed, the continuation of that investigation means that the Court’s scrutiny of events in Venezuela has not ended. Should prosecutors determine that sufficient evidence exists, the ongoing inquiry could still lead to charges against individuals linked to alleged human-rights violations during the period of political unrest.
The announcement from the ICC also included a separate decision concerning eastern Europe. In response to a referral submitted by Lithuania in September 2024, the prosecutor has opened a new investigation into alleged crimes against humanity involving deportation and persecution linked to authorities in Belarus. Although Belarus itself is not a party to the Rome Statute, the Court concluded that it may exercise jurisdiction because elements of the alleged crimes occurred on the territory of Lithuania, which is an ICC member state.
According to the prosecutor’s assessment, there is a reasonable basis to believe that coercive acts leading to deportation formed part of a broader campaign directed against actual or perceived opponents of the Belarusian government. The Office further concluded that the alleged conduct may have been encouraged or approved at the highest levels of the Belarusian state and could constitute part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population.
The scope of the investigation will focus on so-called transboundary crimes—acts that originated in Belarus but involved elements occurring in Lithuania. Prosecutors will examine allegations dating from May 1, 2020 onward, including crimes such as deportation and persecution carried out on political grounds.
The ICC emphasised that a preliminary examination is not itself a criminal investigation but a legal screening process designed to determine whether the statutory criteria for opening a case have been satisfied. In reaching its decisions, the Office of the Prosecutor evaluates questions of jurisdiction, admissibility, gravity and the interests of justice, as required under the Rome Statute.
With the sanctions case now closed and a new investigation opened in the Belarus situation, the Court’s announcement illustrates how the ICC’s prosecutorial process can produce sharply different outcomes even in politically charged disputes. For Venezuela, the decision marks the end of a major international legal challenge launched during the Maduro era, even as the country enters a new and uncertain political chapter.
– global bihari bureau
