September 25, 2026
By: William Cody Hubbard
Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor
THE HAGUE, Netherlands — The International Criminal Court (ICC) has rejected a request to open an examination into the complicity of European arms dealers contributing to the Yemen conflict.
Yemen’s Houthi followers on December 17, 2024, on the outskirts of Sana’a, Yemen. (Photo by Mohammed Hamoud/Getty Images)
In 2019, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), along with other organizations such as Mwatana for Human Rights and Amnesty International, filed a formal communication submitted to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the ICC requesting an investigation to determine whether European corporate and government actors aided and abetted war crimes committed by Saudi Arabia in conjunction with the war in Yemen.
The communication details 26 incidents of airstrikes conducted by the Saudi-UAE Coalition on residential buildings, schools, hospitals, a museum, and heritage sites which could amount to war crimes under the Rome Statute.
According to the ECCHR, the Office of the Prosecutor did not provide any specific legal reasoning as to why it declined to open an investigation, coming to this conclusion almost seven years after the communication was submitted.
The OTP is granted the ability to initiate investigations based on information received by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), such as the ECCHR, and may do so if the OTP determines that the crimes fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC, pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute. The ICC may then choose to exercise its jurisdiction over the matter.
Because the OTP did not provide specific legal reasoning as to why it did not initiate a preliminary investigation, NGOs are left to speculate. The Arms Trade Litigation Monitor (ATLM) argues that there could be a hurdle in establishing a causal link between the conduct of the alleged accomplices of the war crimes and the crimes themselves, reasoning that ambiguity in the nature of arms dealing, such as end-user transfer dates, is a significant challenge to establishing criminal liability.
An argument made in support of prosecution is that European arms dealers should be held criminally liable for war crimes, or crimes of aggression, under Article 25(3)(c) of the Rome Statute, which says that a person shall be held criminally liable for a crime if they aid, abet, or provide the means for the commission of the crime.
Opponents of the OTP decision say that the lack of international accountability lets arms dealers continue to act with impunity.
Similar cases had been filed in ICC member states such as in Italy; however, there is currently a lack of investigation happening in domestic jurisdictions in Europe regarding criminal liability for arms dealers’ involvement in war crimes.
For further information, please see:
European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights – Made in Europe, bombed in Yemen
Arms Trade Litigation Monitor – Arms in Yemen at the International Criminal Court
Human Rights Watch – Yemen: Coalition Bombs Homes in Capital – 21 Dec. 2015
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
