Pull to refresh
Logo
What Changed
Following Why Sign Up
ICC closes Afghanistan investigation that covered US troops

ICC closes Afghanistan investigation that covered US troops

Rule Changes

Judges shut the original 2020 file and moved Taliban-era crimes into a separate case; prosecutors are appealing

Yesterday: Closure made public; prosecutors confirm appeal

Overview

Updated 1 hour ago

In March 2020, appeals judges at the International Criminal Court authorised an investigation into crimes committed on Afghan territory since 2003. That file could have reached American personnel. On 12 November 2026, a pre-trial chamber ordered the record closed.

No one was acquitted. The court split the case instead. A new Afghanistan file, opened in October 2026, covers only the Taliban's persecution of women and girls, and of other people, since the 2021 takeover. The old file, which also covered US troops, Afghan forces and pre-2021 Taliban conduct, is now a closed record. The prosecutor's office has appealed.

Why it matters

The only ICC file that could have examined American conduct in Afghanistan is shut, leaving the court's Afghanistan work aimed solely at the Taliban.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

6
Years the original investigation ran
Authorised in March 2020 and closed in November 2026, after more than a decade of preliminary examination.
2
Separate Afghanistan situations at the ICC
The closed 02/17 file and the Taliban-focused 02/26 file opened in October 2026.
4
Arrest warrants issued against Taliban leaders
Issued in July and September 2025; the chamber ordered them moved to the new file.
6
States parties behind the 2024 referral
Their November 2024 referral on gender persecution produced the new investigation.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Sign up to generate historical perspectives on this story.

Log in Sign Up

People Involved

RA
Rosario Salvatore Aitala
Presiding Judge, Pre-Trial Chamber II
Sitting judge; authored the closure decision
 Hibatullah Akhundzada
Hibatullah Akhundzada
Taliban supreme leader
Subject of an ICC arrest warrant; not in custody
 Abdul Hakim Haqqani
Abdul Hakim Haqqani
Taliban chief justice
Subject of an ICC arrest warrant; not in custody
 Neda Mohammad Nadim
Neda Mohammad Nadim
Taliban minister of higher education
Subject of an ICC arrest warrant; not in custody

Organizations Involved

International Criminal Court
International Criminal Court
Permanent international tribunal
Closed its original Afghanistan file; new Taliban-focused file active

The Hague-based court that prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Office of the Prosecutor General (OPG)
Office of the Prosecutor General (OPG)
Prosecutorial body
Appealing the closure

The ICC office that conducts investigations and requests arrest warrants.
Taliban (Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan)
Taliban (Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan)
Governing authority
Four leaders under ICC arrest warrants

The movement that took power in Afghanistan in August 2021 and governs by decree.

Timeline

November 2017 November 2026

12 events Latest: Yesterday Showing 8 of 12
Tap a bar to jump to that date

  1. Closure made public; prosecutors confirm appeal

    Latest Statement

    Court filings released on a Friday show the investigation that could have examined US personnel is shut.

  2. Judges close the original Afghanistan record

    Legal

    Pre-Trial Chamber II finds prosecutors cannot effectively pursue the 02/17 investigation and orders it closed.

  3. Prosecutors appeal; appeals chamber sets a schedule

    Legal

    The Appeals Chamber allows victim representatives and the six referring states to file by 3 December 2026.

  4. Arrest warrants moved to the new file

    Legal

    The chamber orders records, including the four Taliban warrants, transferred to the Afghanistan II docket.

  5. Afghanistan II becomes a separate ICC situation

    Legal

    The court's presidency opens the new file and assigns it to Pre-Trial Chamber II.

  6. Chamber orders a new investigation on the referral

    Legal

    Judges tell prosecutors to open a separate investigation if they still believe the legal threshold is met.

  7. Two more Taliban officials face warrants

    Legal

    Warrants are issued for Habibullah Agha and Neda Mohammad Nadim.

  8. Arrest warrants issued for Taliban leaders

    Legal

    Pre-Trial Chamber II orders warrants for Haibatullah Akhundzada and Abdul Hakim Haqqani over persecution.

  9. Six states refer Taliban gender persecution to the court

    Legal

    The referral asks prosecutors to examine crimes against women and girls after the 2021 takeover.

  10. Appeals chamber reverses and authorises the investigation

    Legal

    The Appeals Chamber amends the earlier ruling and allows an investigation into crimes on Afghan territory since 2003.

  11. Judges reject the Afghanistan investigation

    Legal

    Pre-Trial Chamber II declines the request, saying an investigation would not serve the interests of justice.

  12. Prosecutor seeks authorisation to investigate Afghanistan

    Legal

    The Office of the Prosecutor asks judges to open a formal investigation covering crimes since May 2003.

Scenarios

1

Appeals judges reverse the closure and reopen the original file

Possible Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: The Office of the Prosecutor, which appealed the July 2026 split and the November 2026 closure

Prosecutors argue the pre-trial chamber moved too fast and split a single authorised investigation in two. If the Appeals Chamber agrees, the 02/17 record reopens and the court's Afghanistan remit expands back to conduct by US and Afghan forces. Victim representatives and the six referring states have until 3 December 2026 to file submissions.

2

Closure holds, and Afghanistan II is the court's only active file

Likely Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: Pre-Trial Chamber II, which found prosecutors had not shown they could investigate further

The chamber cited more than six years of investigation, the time elapsed since the alleged crimes, and limits on gathering evidence in Afghanistan. If that reasoning survives appeal, the four Taliban warrants proceed in the new file and no ICC charges touching US personnel are possible from this period.

3

Prosecutors seek a fresh ISIS-K investigation

Unlikely Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Pre-Trial Chamber II, which explicitly left this route open in its decision

The chamber noted that prosecutors had brought no charges on their third line of inquiry, Islamic State Khorasan Province attacks since 2016, and said they may submit a new request to investigate under the court's authorisation rules. That would create a third Afghanistan-related file, aimed at neither US forces nor the Taliban.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

April 2019 - March 2020

Judges reject, then appeals judges authorise, the Afghanistan investigation (2019-2020)

Pre-Trial Chamber II refused the prosecutor's request to investigate Afghanistan, reasoning that the likely suspects and evidence were too limited for the case to serve the interests of justice. The Appeals Chamber reversed that test in March 2020 and authorised the investigation.

Then

The investigation opened, but no charges touching US personnel followed.

Now

The case established that pre-trial judges can shape the scope of an authorised investigation, a power they used again in 2026.

Why this matters now

The same chamber that was reversed in 2020 is the one that closed the file in 2026, and the same gatekeeping question is now before the appeals judges again.

June 2020 and 2025

US sanctions on ICC officials (2020 and 2025)

The United States sanctioned senior ICC officials after the court's Afghanistan investigation moved forward, and imposed a second round of sanctions in 2025 following arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. The measures included asset freezes and travel bans on named court officials.

Then

The court's access to US-based evidence and banking systems was curtailed.

Now

The sanctions made clear that investigating US personnel or allies carries costs for the institution, not just for the individuals named.

Why this matters now

The Afghanistan file closed by the 2026 decision was the first ICC investigation to examine American conduct, and the one that drew the heaviest US retaliation.

2014 - 2016

The ICC's Kenya cases collapse (2014-2016)

Charges against senior Kenyan officials arising from the 2007-08 post-election violence fell apart. Prosecutors withdrew or dropped cases after alleging witness intimidation and a lack of cooperation from the Kenyan government.

Then

No convictions resulted from the court's largest early African investigation.

Now

The collapses shaped the court's caution about opening cases it could not see through to trial.

Why this matters now

It shows how ICC cases usually die: not with an acquittal, but with prosecutors conceding they cannot gather evidence, which is the reasoning the chamber used to close the Afghanistan file.

Sources

(7)
+1
Al Jazeera International Criminal Court Military Times The Hill EJIL: Talk! Anadolu Agency International Criminal Court