Pillay’s Nobel honors her justice work as U.S. sanctions put ICC victim aid at risk

At the Rwanda tribunal, Pillay’s work contributed to a 1998 judgment establishing that rape and sexual violence can constitute genocide when committed with the intent to destroy a protected group. The judgment established the significance of those crimes under international law.

The commission Pillay chaired reached a grave conclusion about Gaza. In a report issued in September 2025, it found that Israel had committed genocide against Palestinians there; Israel rejected the report. That was a commission’s finding, not a criminal-court judgment. An inquiry can make findings, but a prize or report cannot deliver a court’s judgment or the remedies victims may need. CBS News covered the commission’s conclusion and Israel’s rejection.

The ICC Trust Fund for Victims warned that U.S. sanctions could disrupt the financial channels, services and partnerships needed for reparations and other assistance to victims and affected communities. That risk puts the people harmed by atrocities—not only judges and investigators—at the center of the fight over the court’s ability to work.

Sovereignty cannot excuse disabling accountability

The Trump administration says the ICC threatens U.S. sovereignty and should not prosecute Americans. It also opposes the court’s actions involving Israel. Those are the administration’s stated reasons for sanctions, not independent findings about the court’s authority.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a video address shared on social media: “We will ban transactions with this rogue court, cutting off their resources and crippling their ability to operate against us,” Euronews reported. The administration’s strongest argument is that it should resist a court it believes may claim power over U.S. citizens. But sanctions against the ICC as an institution reach beyond that dispute: the court says the measures aim to disrupt its operations and intimidate people who work with or cooperate with it.

Institution-wide restrictions do not resolve the sovereignty dispute. The court says the sanctions are intended to disrupt its work, while its victims’ fund warns that assistance could suffer.

The people with the least power in these conflicts are not setting the terms of the dispute between Washington and the court. When pressure weakens investigators or threatens victim assistance, those harmed by atrocities face another barrier between their experience and accountability. That is why the Trust Fund’s warning deserves more attention than the political language used to justify the sanctions.

Victims need more than recognition

A Nobel can make a career visible and affirm the importance of international law. It cannot protect a court from sanctions, guarantee its independence or provide reparations. Treating the award as an endpoint would confuse praise for the work with the conditions that allow it to continue.

The ICC has asked member states for help maintaining its operations. Courthouse News Service covered the court’s appeal. Those states should provide sustained support for the court and protect the victim-assistance work the Trust Fund says may be disrupted. The U.S. administration should lift its sanctions rather than impose institution-wide penalties over possible prosecutions of Americans and the court’s actions involving Israel.

Honoring Pillay means defending the possibility that investigators can document crimes and courts can pursue accountability without powerful governments deciding which cases may proceed. The Nobel is recognition. The test is whether governments back independent justice when doing so is politically difficult.