Former judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) have voiced strong objections to the procedures adopted in the investigation of alleged sexual misconduct by ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan. The controversy centers on the perceived breaches of confidentiality and due process in the unfolding investigation, according to a statement released on Saturday.

Cuno Tarfusser, a former ICC judge, alongside another ex-judge who chose to remain unnamed, highlighted that the public disclosure of Khan's identity in the allegations and the decision to outsource the investigative responsibilities could potentially deter future complaints. "The manner in which the proceedings against Karim Khan are being handled is deeply disturbing and even scandalous," Tarfusser remarked.

The allegations against Khan first surfaced online in October 2024, with claims of inappropriate conduct towards an associate at the ICC. In response, the Assembly of States Parties to the ICC, spearheaded by Finnish ambassador Päivi Kaukoranta, appointed the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) to lead an external investigation. However, the timing of the allegations has spurred additional scrutiny, coinciding with Khan’s efforts to issue arrest warrants for Israeli officials, raising suspicions about potential motives to undermine the ICC’s operations.

Further complicating the scenario, a July report alleged that a member of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s legal team had threatened Khan and his wife following demands from Israeli authorities to keep the ICC arrest warrants confidential, including one for Netanyahu himself.

The complainant in the case against Khan has denied any linkage between her accusations and the arrest warrants or any involvement with intelligence agencies. She affirmed her support for the integrity of all ICC investigations.

The OIOS, an independent entity within the UN Secretariat, is tasked with conducting investigations impartially, ensuring the confidentiality of both the complainants and those accused. Their procedures mandate strict measures to protect the identities and privacy of all involved parties, a standard that critics argue was not upheld in Khan's case.

This clash over procedural integrity highlights the complex interplay of legal ethics, international justice, and the challenges of maintaining transparency while protecting individual rights within global governance structures.