MIAMI — A notable human rights lawyer has discreetly severed ties with the International Criminal Court (ICC) due to discontent over what he perceives as the chief prosecutor’s failure to take action against members of the Venezuelan government, headed by President Nicolás Maduro, for alleged crimes against humanity.
Claudio Grossman, a Chilean-born attorney and a former law school dean at American University in Washington, served as a special adviser to ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan starting in November 2021. In his unpaid role, Grossman provided counsel to Khan regarding the worsening human rights conditions in Venezuela.
In a strongly worded email sent to Khan last month, Grossman expressed that his moral principles no longer allow him to remain silent while the Venezuelan government continues to perpetrate abuses, expel foreign diplomats, and hinder human rights monitoring efforts from the United Nations, without intervention from the ICC.
“I can no longer justify the choice not to take correspondingly serious action against the perpetrators of the grave violations,” Grossman wrote while declining an offer from Khan’s office to renew his contract in September. A source familiar with the ongoing investigation into Venezuela confirmed to the press that a subsequent call from Khan asking Grossman to reconsider his decision was unsuccessful.
Following inquiries about Grossman’s status, his name was removed from the ICC’s official website. The prosecutor’s office acknowledged Grossman’s contributions but did not delve into the rationale behind his departure from the court based in The Hague, Netherlands. Grossman opted not to provide any comments on the situation.
Pressure is mounting on Khan to proceed with indictments against Venezuelan officials, including Maduro. This comes amid allegations of misconduct concerning a female aide and the prospect of U.S. sanctions resulting from his controversial decision to pursue the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for purported war crimes in Gaza.
Since the establishment of the Rome Statute in 2002, which empowered the ICC to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, the court has acted only when local judicial systems fail to undertake their investigations.
Furthermore, with Maduro’s power tightening in the lead-up to his swearing-in for a third term on January 10—following an election marred by serious claims of fraud and subsequent crackdowns—the calls for actionable steps from the ICC intensify. The aftermath of the elections reportedly saw over 2,000 arrests and at least 20 fatalities.
The U.S. and some leftist leaders in Latin America have urged the Venezuelan authorities to present voting records to validate the tallies put forward by Maduro’s opponents, who assert that their candidate, Edmundo González, won by a significant margin.
Opponents of Maduro have expressed grievances that the ICC exhibits a double standard in its operations. Critics note the ICC’s prompt actions regarding the arrests of Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin for their actions in Gaza and Ukraine, while Venezuelan officials under investigation for over three years have seen little progress.
In a recent letter, González and fellow opposition leader María Corina Machado appealed to Grossman and 18 other special advisers for assistance, asserting that “what is at stake is the life and well-being of Venezuelans.” They underscored that the protracted inaction raises legitimate doubts about the integrity of a system designed for global accountability.
Three years ago, at the request of several Latin American governments, Khan launched an investigation into allegations of violence perpetrated by Venezuelan security forces against anti-government protestors. During this time, he has also indicated a desire to provide technical assistance to encourage local authorities to act before the ICC assumes jurisdiction.
Most recently, Khan criticized the ongoing human rights violations in Venezuela, stating that assurances from officials to investigate these abuses cannot go on indefinitely. He remarked that he has not observed the implementation of laws and practices in Venezuela that he had anticipated, highlighting that the burden now falls on Venezuela’s own legal system.
In a statement, Maduro’s administration expressed disappointment that Khan was “misled” by campaigns on social media purportedly fostered by extreme right factions and Western entities seeking to impose legal dominance over Venezuela.
Critics have also suggested that delays may be related to a potential conflict of interest, referencing Khan’s sister-in-law, Venkateswari Alagendra, who has defended the Venezuelan government in two prior ICC hearings. The ICC’s code of conduct advises against any conflicts arising from personal relationships that could affect impartiality.
While Khan’s office has refrained from commenting on this matter, he asserted in a recent filing that familial relationships like that of Alagendra don’t necessitate disqualification. He emphasized that he remains committed to a fair and independent investigation.
Survivors of the Maduro administration’s actions are urging the ICC to finalize its investigation without pressing for Khan’s recusal. As numerous Venezuelans seek refuge from Maduro’s rule, anticipation for progressive developments from regional governments continues to grow.
“Many in Latin America expect the ICC prosecutor to respond more decisively,” remarked Juan Papier, deputy director for the Americas at Human Rights Watch. He criticized the lengthy negotiations with Venezuelan authorities, emphasizing the prevailing impunity and lack of judicial independence, which make the ICC the most tangible avenue for obtaining justice.
