Washington, Feb. 13, 2025 - The US Treasury Department said it had sanctioned Karim Asad Ahmad Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, under an executive order aimed at the court.
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control said Khan, who is based in The Hague, had been added to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List. The designation was tied to Executive Order 14203, which President Donald Trump signed on February 6, 2025, under the title “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court.”
The move placed one of the ICC’s most prominent officials directly in the crosshairs of US sanctions policy. The listing identified Khan as a United Kingdom national born in Edinburgh in 1970. It also indicated that the measure was being carried out through the Treasury sanctions system rather than through a separate criminal or civil process.
The action was part of a broader confrontation between Washington and the international court. While the Treasury notice was administrative in form, its effect was political: it signaled that the US was using financial penalties to respond to the court’s work. The notice did not itself spell out the underlying dispute in detail, but the designation was clearly linked to the executive order targeting the ICC.
Sanctions of this kind can have consequences for banking, travel and access to US-linked services. For an international prosecutor, that matters even without a separate judicial finding. The point of a blocked-person designation is not simply symbolic pressure. It can complicate normal professional and financial operations and can deter counterparties from dealing with the named individual.
The Treasury entry was brief, but it left little ambiguity about the policy choice. Khan was named. The executive order was named. And the ICC itself had been singled out as a target. That combination marked a notable escalation in tensions between the United States and the world’s permanent war-crimes tribunal.
The designation also matters because it shows how far the sanctions dispute had moved from rhetoric to bureaucracy. A blocked-person listing can affect ordinary transactions even when it is not accompanied by a dramatic public announcement. For an official living in the Netherlands and operating in an international legal environment, that kind of designation can complicate everything from banking to travel logistics.
The Treasury notice itself was brief, but the symbolism was extensive. By linking Khan directly to the executive order, the US made clear that the ICC dispute had become a sanctions issue, not just a political disagreement. The practical and diplomatic consequences of that decision are likely to extend beyond one name on a list.
The ICC designation also carries a wider message for international institutions. When the US uses sanctions against a sitting court prosecutor, it signals not just disagreement with a case or investigation, but a willingness to penalize the machinery of international justice itself. That will be read in The Hague and beyond as more than a narrow administrative step.
Because the Treasury notice named Khan directly, the sanction was immediately personal. It did not wait for an appeal or a lengthy dispute to play out. Instead, it took effect through the US blocked-person system, showing how executive sanctions can be used to send an instant political signal while leaving the legal disagreement unresolved.
