EXPLAINER
ICC’s 125 member states will vote by secret ballot on Friday on the fate of Khan, who faces sexual misconduct allegations.
Published On 24 Jul 2026
Members of the International Criminal Court (ICC) will meet at the United Nations Headquarters in New York today to vote on whether to fire the court’s prosecutor, Karim Khan, who faces sexual misconduct allegations.
The vote is the culmination of a more than two-year saga that has put the tribunal under pressure as it investigates Gaza war crimes.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Here’s what we know about the vote and the case against Khan:
Why does Khan face a removal vote?
The 56-year-old barrister is accused of sexually harassing a junior colleague who worked as his direct assistant, allegations he denies.
Khan’s accuser, named only as Sarah, recently told CNN that Khan had shown escalating behaviour of touching and groping her, recounting a time she said he touched her intimately while she was pretending to be asleep.
“There is no way for something to be consensual when you have such a power disparity,” Sarah told the network.
The ICC has suspended Khan from his official duties pending today’s vote. That decision was made based on a UN investigative report, the advice of an ad hoc panel of judicial experts and written submissions, according to the ICC’s oversight body.
How does the process work?
For Khan to be fired, an absolute majority of at least 63 of the court’s 125 member states will have to agree in the secret ballot. The vote is due at about 3pm local time (19:00 GMT) and the result is expected to be announced at 5:30pm (21:30 GMT).
If Khan is fired, that would immediately trigger the election process for a new ICC prosecutor who is not expected to be voted in before next year.
Any active ICC warrants will remain in place even if Khan is dismissed because only ICC judges have the authority to withdraw warrants.
How has Khan responded?
Khan has denied any wrongdoing.
His lawyer, Sareta Ashraph, told CNN he denies “any form of sexual contact, relationship, consensual or non-consensual” with the alleged victim.
Khan has also accused the ICC process of being “unjustified and unlawful”, saying the move to suspend him violated the court’s own procedures.
His lawyers have pointed to a panel of independent judges who found there was no evidence to establish the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
They have also argued Khan should have the right to answer the charges against him at today’s vote, which he is barred from attending due to US sanctions against him.
“We know of no court or tribunal in any proper and fair legal system that bars a person facing the gravest professional sanction from being heard,” Khan’s lawyers, Tayab Ali and Sareta Ashraph, wrote in a letter cited by The Associated Press.
Why has the case become politicised?
The case against Khan has become entwined with one of the ICC’s highest-profile investigations – into Israel’s war crimes in Gaza.
As prosecutor, Khan was leading probes into multiple conflicts, but his decision in 2024 to seek arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, prompted an intense backlash from governments and advocacy groups.
Israel’s ally the US imposed sanctions on Khan and other ICC officials, while pledging “a whole-of-government response to systematically disable” the tribunal’s ability to operate.
“Political considerations have been folded into this, especially as it is the first time a prosecutor has pursued warrants against a Western ally,” said Iva Vukusic, a researcher at Utrecht University.
Khan and some of his backers have argued the case against him is politically motivated.
Former European Union chief diplomat Josep Borrell wrote in an editorial that the case against Khan is “obviously part of a larger offensive against the ICC”.
A group of Palestinian organisations penned an open letter expressing concerns about the investigation into Khan, including accusing the ICC’s executive committee of “unwarranted political interference” and “subverting the disciplinary process”.
Khan’s accuser, Sarah, has dismissed claims that her allegations against the prosecutor are politically driven or that she is part of an Israeli effort to undermine him.
“I think many parties have for their own agenda conflated the two things,” Sarah told CNN, adding that such conflation has “only helped to distract and deflect from the validity” of her complaint.
