Commenting on the gravity of this decision for victims of crimes against humanity, Marceau Sivieude, Amnesty International’s regional director for West Africa, stated: “Withdrawing from the ICC amounts to a headlong retreat by these governments from their international law and justice obligations. It will also further imperil civilian lives and further enshrine impunity for crimes under international law.”

The three countries recently formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), a mutual defense and economic confederation that seeks to reject the political influence of the Western powers. In September 2025, the countries won international criticism when they announced their decision to exit the Court. Justifying this decision, a joint communique was issued, in which they branded the ICC an instrument of neo-colonialism and selective justice, saying they chose to defend their national sovereignty against what they termed Western imperialism.

On June 18, Niger became the first of the three to formally submit its written instrument of withdrawal to the UN secretary general, in accordance with Article 127 of the Rome Statute. Six days later, Burkina Faso and Mali followed suit. Pursuant to the rules of the Rome Statute, a country’s withdrawal takes effect a year after submission of the formal notification. Before the AES made its sudden announcement of collective withdrawal last September, other countries had recently withdrawn from the international court, including Burundi and the Philippines.

The AES countries are currently engaged in coordinated military actions to beat back surging jihadist offensives, which have resulted in massive civilian casualties across their shared borders. The Sahel war has contributed to an ongoing humanitarian crisis in the region, and resulted in multiple massacres and extrajudicial killings committed by state security forces and paramilitaries with Kremlin ties (overseen by Moscow’s Africa Corps), as well as by insurgent groups.

Women and girls live in a climate of fear due to the sheer scale of gang rapes, abductions, sexual slavery, and forced marriages orchestrated by armed groups and unaccountable actors. With internal judicial systems effectively paralyzed, the ICC presented a mechanism for justice in the region. The AES has proposed an alternative Sahel Criminal Court for Human Rights, to be based in Mali.

From JURIST, July 4. Used with permission. Internal links added.

Photo: Mali Government Information Center via Morning Star

Commenting on the large scale of atrocities committed against civilians in Mali, senior Sahel researcher at Human Rights Watch, Ilaria Allegrozzi, stated:

As fighting flares up again, the warring parties in Mali are once again carrying out grave abuses against civilians, repeating former patterns of harming civilians… All parties are obligated to respect international humanitarian law, take all feasible steps to avoid civilian harm, and facilitate access to humanitarian aid.

The crisis in Mali began in January 2012, after a Tuareg separatist rebellion in the north allied with Islamist armed groups and seized much of the country’s territory, later to be driven back. However, a sudden intensification of violence began this April after the al-Qaeda-affiliated Group for the Support of Islam & Muslims (Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin, or JNIM) formed a pact with Tuareg fighters of the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA), a faction with which they have had a rocky relationship, to carry out attacks across Mali.

Although they have formed a temporary alliance, the two insurgent have differing ideologies and aims. JNIM seeks to establish an ultra-conservative Islamic state across the Sahel region, whereas the Tuareg separatists are fighting for the independence of their homeland in Mali’s north, which they call Azawad. In response to their new alliance, the Malian armed forces have carried out drone strikes that resulted in multiple fatalities. The armed forces and militia groups are also believed to have carried out reprisals against Fulani communities, who are stigmatized as JNIM collaborators. Russian fighters from the Africa Corps (formerly the Wagner Group) have also participated in atrocities.

Human Rights Watch criticized all sides in the conflict for contributing to the mass suffering of the civilian population, noting abuses such as publicly executing civilians, burning vehicles, and conducting military operations that have killed non-combatants, including children. In September 2025, JNIM cut off the entry of fuel supplies into Mali, blocking and attacking tanker-truck convoys from neighboring countries and killing truck drivers, triggering severe shortages that halted transport, disrupted education and electricity, and paralyzed daily life in the capital Bamako.

The prohibition on deliberately killing civilians during armed conflict is codified under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and is considered a jus cogens norm, which is non-derogable in nature.

From JURIST, June 30. Used with permission. Internal links added.

Map: PCL

Ukraine’s religious sites have been repeatedly targeted by Russia over the course of the war.

Photo via Wikipedia

HRW analyzed around 8,000 cases involving property seizures filed between March 2024 and January 2026 in 25 courts in occupied areas, with court records showing “consistent disregard of evidence of ownership and efforts by owners to assert their rights.” The seizure of property has affected millions of displaced Ukrainians or those who refuse to re-register their properties under Russian law, as they are stripped of shelter, income, or the means to sustain their lives. The rights group claims that this process undermines the prospect of refugees and internally displaced people returning home in “safety and dignity.”

HRW associate Ukraine director Yulia Gorbunova stated: “Millions of Ukrainians have been forced to flee their homes in areas under Russian occupation due to the ongoing war. Now they also face the unlawful seizure of their property as Russia blatantly disregards its obligations as an occupying power.”

In October 2022, Russian authorities introduced “an unlawful and opaque administrative process” in occupied areas, through which Ukrainian owners are required to re-register their property under Russian law by January 2028. Ukrainian property owners are also required to obtain Russian citizenship to participate in this process. The deadline, however, was later brought forward to July 2026, with Russian authorities claiming residents had already had “more than enough time” to re-register their property. The authorities designate the private property that is not re-registered as “ownerless,” after which courts transfer it to municipal ownership.

Following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russia unilaterally annexed the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts (regions), imposing their own administrative and legal systems. This annexation has been rejected as unlawful under international law. Russian authorities have also “methodically made passportization a tool of administrative control by linking all essential services to accepting Russian citizenship,” including phone communication, as SIM cards from local operators now require Russian identification.

According to Maksym Beznosiuk, a strategic policy specialist: “Moscow’s ultimate objective is to force pro-Russian allegiance and erase any traces of Ukrainian identity. Ukrainians who resist these efforts are receiving administrative removal orders and forced expulsions.”

Article 51 of Customary International Humanitarian Law, which applies universally to all warring parties, prohibits an occupying power from confiscating private property without justification of military necessity. Regulation 46 of the Hague Convention (1907), to which Russia is a party, provides a similar prohibition.

From JURIST, May 28. Used with permission. Internal links added.

See our last report on Russian war crimes in Ukraine.

Map: PCL

Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon.

Recommended reading:

“Hasan Piker’s Take on China May Matter More Than His Views on Israel”
by Danny Postel, New Lines

“New Political Litmus Test: Hasan Piker”
by Michael Donnelly, This Small Planet

“The Wrong Stuff: Hasan Piker and the politics of reactionary clickbait”
by Joseph Grosso, Left Critique of the Left

“The real problem with Hasan Piker. Spoiler: It’s not about Israel.”
by Eric Levitz, Vox

Production by Chris Rywalt

We ask listeners to support us with a small monthly donation via Patreon or PayPal.

Photo: Xinjiang Judicial Administration via The Diplomat

The resolution calls upon states to comply with the obligations set out by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), giving legal force to the non-binding advisory opinion issued by the UN high court in July 2025. Pursuant to the UNGA resolution, countries now have a duty under international law to take all possible steps to avoid contributing to climate change.

Vanuatu, in collaboration with other Pacific island nations, drafted the proposed resolution earlier this year, urging countries to consider the impacts their greenhouse gas emissions have on small nations. These nations are among those facing the largest burden of climate change, such as extreme weather events, crop failure, and sea level rise, despite their lack of a significant contribution to global warming.

However, following negotiations amongst the states, the text of Vanuatu’s resolution was altered significantly. Notably missing from the adopted draft was the “International Register of Damage” provision, which would have created the duty to maintain a “comprehensive and transparent record” of evidence of damage attributable to climate change.

Nevertheless, under this resolution, states may be required to compensate injured nations for any damage they contribute to in violation of ICJ-mandated climate obligations.

In a statement after the vote, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres reiterated that those contributing the least to climate change are “paying the largest price” for its effects. He also indicated the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels, stating:

The science is clear: fossil fuels are the principle driver of the climate crisis. The path to climate justice runs through a rapid, just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels towards renewable energy.

The resolution’s text also affirms that states need to do their part to keep global temperatures from exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius, a target set out by the Paris Climate Agreement that would require a rapid decline in fossil fuel emissions to achieve.

Despite an overwhelming 141 votes to adopt the resolution, eight countries were in opposition, including three on the list of the 10 largest greenhouse gas emitters globally: the United States, Russia and Iran. Also voting against were top oil producers such as Saudi Arabia.

Following the resolution’s adoption, Deputy Representative of the United States to the United Nations Tammy Bruce issued a highly critical statement opposing the resolution and challenging its legality. Bruce said that the ICJ’s “unfounded” view that states have a legal duty to prevent global transboundary harm is legally incorrect. He also rejected the notion that “climate change is an unprecedented challenge of civilizational proportions” as politicized and alarmist.

In the US, the Trump administration has vocally opposed the idea that climate change is a serious global issue, and has continued to roll back climate protections within the country. Following Vanuatu’s proposed resolution, the administration pressured the small nation to withdraw its draft due to its potential to “pose a major threat to US industry.”

In spite of the pushback from major emitters, Guterres described the resolution’s adoption as a victory for the planet, calling it an advance for climate justice and for holding states accountable for their actions.

From JURIST, May 22. Used with permission. Internal links added.

Note: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) issued a similar ruling last year. See our podcast on the ICJ and IACHR rulings, “Meanwhile, the planet is dying….”

Photo: NASA via Flickr

Elections Alberta affirmed that it received the petition, “A Referendum Relating to Alberta Independence,” and signature sheets from a “pro-sovereignty” group, Stay Free Alberta. The group told the CBC News that it has collected over 301,000 signatures, significantly more than the 178,000 threshold. The proposed referendum will ask voters: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta should cease to be a part of Canada to become an independent state?”

On April 10, Justice Shaina Leonard of the Alberta Court of King’s Bench granted a temporary stay, barring the Chief Electoral Officer Gordon McClure from verifying the petition. She accepted that the lack of consultation could cause irreparable harm to First Nations, including Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, Piikani Nation, Siksika Nation and Blood Tribe. The First Nations welcomed the decision. Following the stay, the verification cannot take place until the court completes the judicial review.

There are other doubts on the legality of the petition. On Dec. 6, 2025, the same court heldthat the referendum proposal is unconstitutional. Justice Colin Feasby found that the proposal does not guarantee Charter rights or Aboriginal and Treaty rights to the same extent as the provided by Constitution Act, 1982. However, an amendment to the Citizen Initiative Act (CIA) came into effect on Dec. 11. It removes the provision requiring a referendum proposal to be compatible with the aforementioned rights. A “transitional provision” also ensures that the amendment applies to the referendum proposal, which predated the amendment. In granting the stay, Leonard agreed that the constitutionality of the CIA amendment and the potential applicability of the previous ruling are serious questions to be adjudicated.

Meanwhile, pro-unity group Forever Canadian claimed that it had already received over 404,000 signatures in support of the province remaining in Canada.

In related news, Elections Alberta is investigating a breach of the provincial voter list. On April 30, the authority revealed that the Republican Party of Alberta provided the voter list to a pro-sovereignty Centurion Project Ltd., which then publicized the list. While the provincial Election Act allows political parties to access the list, it strictly forbids distributing the list to a third party.

McClure said the authority was unable to investigate sooner because the recent Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, heightened the threshold for for opening an investigation from “grounds to warrant” to “reasonable grounds.” Similarly, the provincial privacy commissioner Diane McLeod said Alberta’s Personal Information Protection Act does not regulate political parties. They both called for reforms to their empowering statutes to strengthen accountability.

From JURIST, May 7. Used with permission.

Note: Prime Minister Mark Carney has admonished the US not to interfere in the Alberta independence drive, telling reporters in January: “We expect the US administration to respect Canadian sovereignty.” This comes in response to reports that leaders of the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project met with Trump administration officials. British Columbia Premier David Eby also sharply criticized the meetings, saying they amounted to “treason.” Carney and Eby were also responding to an aggressive online campaign—including AI-produced “slopaganda”—in support of Alberta becoming the “51st state.” However, while much of this propaganda comes from the US, reports indicate that some of it is being produced in Russia as well. (Politico, El Pais, NBC, The Hill, CBC, CBC)

See our last report on the struggle in Alberta, and our podcast, “MAGA-fascism and the struggle in Canada”

Photo: Magalie L’Abbe via Alberta Politics

The alarming reports that Nigeria has established “concentration camps” for the Fulani ethnic minority cast an ironic light on Nigeria’s tension with the Sahel states of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso to the north. These three regimes have broken from the Western imperial camp (to embrace the nascent Russian imperial camp)—but are likewise subjecting their Fulani minorities to persecution and massacre. With the recent shock rebel offensive in Mali, the “terrorist” stigma that attaches to the Fulani and Tuareg peoples across the imperial camps makes their position more precarious than ever. Meanwhile, prominent voices on the both the right and the (supposed) “left” are spreading propaganda about the struggle in West Africa that is alarmingly wrong, because it exclusively views the crisis through a campist lens. In Episode 327 of the CounterVortex podcast, Bill Weinberg tries to provide some clarity on these fast-escalating and grossly under-reported conflicts.

Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon.

Production by Chris Rywalt

We ask listeners to support us with a small monthly donation via Patreon or PayPal.

Map: PCL

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has stated that the strike was deliberate, pointing to the drone’s low flight altitude as evidence. A criminal investigation has been opened under Article 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine—violation of the laws and customs of war.

Zelensky also announced that he held a meeting with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director-general Rafael Grossi on the 40th anniversary of the disaster. “I emphasized the unacceptability of formalizing and legitimizing Russia’s presence at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant,” he wrote on the X social media platform. (World Nuclear News, Chosun, AA Energy Terminal, The Guardian, BelSat,

Russian forces briefly occupied the Chernobyl site at the start of the war in 2022, but later withdrew. Russia continues to occupy and have operational control of the Zaporizhzhia facility, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant.

Strikes across Ukraine, Russian-occupied territory and Russia killed at least 16 people on the 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster. The greatest toll was in Dnipro, where Russian drone and missile strikes on the city killed at least nine. (AP)

See our last reports on the Chernobyl and Zaporizhzhia nuclear plants.

Photo: Wikipedia