The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) request for arrest warrants for Taliban leader Haibatullah Akhundzada and their chief justice, Abdul Hakim Haqqani, is a significant milestone in the fight for justice and accountability, according to experts from the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP).
The court accuses the two Taliban leaders of being “criminally responsible for persecuting Afghan women and girls,” marking the first time the ICC has pursued an indictment based solely on gender persecution.
“The ICC’s request highlights the severity of the Taliban’s systemic repression and reinforces the global commitment to holding perpetrators of human rights abuses accountable,” said Belquis Ahmadi, a senior expert at the U.S. Institute of Peace. Lauren Baillie and Scott Worden, also experts at the institute, underscored the case’s potential legal and diplomatic ramifications, noting that while the Taliban are unlikely to comply, the move could increase pressure on them both internally and internationally.
Since taking power in August 2021, the Taliban have imposed harsh restrictions on women, barring them from secondary and higher education, prohibiting them from working in most professions, and severely limiting their presence in public spaces. These measures, which human rights organizations describe as “gender apartheid,” have drawn widespread condemnation, but tangible consequences for Taliban leaders have remained rare—until now.
The ICC’s move represents a groundbreaking legal step, as it is the first time the court has pursued gender persecution as the sole charge in an indictment. If the arrest warrants are issued and prosecutions proceed, the case could set a precedent for holding regimes accountable for systematically targeting women.
“The ICC is a court of last resort,” Baillie explained. “Since the Taliban have completely dismantled Afghanistan’s independent judicial system and barred women from accessing justice, there are no other legal venues for Afghan women to seek accountability.”
While the ICC has previously included gender persecution as part of other cases, this is the first instance in which it is the central focus. If successful, the case could strengthen international legal frameworks on gender-based crimes, potentially influencing prosecutions in other contexts where women face state-sanctioned oppression, such as Iran.
However, some legal experts and advocates argue that “persecution” does not fully capture the scope of the Taliban’s repression. Many have pushed for the recognition of gender apartheid as a distinct crime under international law, but the ICC currently has no legal framework to prosecute it.
Challenges in enforcing the arrest warrants
Despite the legal significance of the ICC’s action, enforcement remains a major hurdle. According to the experts, the Taliban’s top leadership has not traveled outside Afghanistan since seizing power, and the ICC relies on its member states to execute arrests. Given that Afghanistan is not a party to the ICC’s Rome Statute, Akhundzada and Haqqani are unlikely to be taken into custody unless they enter a jurisdiction willing to comply with the court’s decision.
Nonetheless, human rights advocates emphasize the symbolic and diplomatic weight of the ICC’s decision. “This is a clear message to the Taliban that the world has not turned a blind eye to their crimes,” Ahmadi said. “It is also a powerful recognition of the tireless efforts of Afghan women’s rights activists who have risked everything to document these abuses.”
Taliban’s response and potential internal divisions
Taliban have historically dismissed international legal actions, and they are expected to reject the ICC’s authority outright. However, experts at the U.S. Institute of Peace note that the indictment could deepen internal divisions within the Taliban, particularly as some members push for more engagement with the international community.
Sher Abbas Stanikzai, a senior Taliban official, recently voiced rare public criticism of the Taliban’s policies, calling the ban on girls’ education an “injustice” and stating that it was not based on Islamic law. His comments reflect growing tensions within the Taliban, as more pragmatic members recognize that continued isolation is worsening Afghanistan’s economic crisis.
“The Taliban will publicly present a united front against the ICC’s decision,” said Worden. “But privately, those in the movement who favor reopening schools for girls and strengthening ties with the West may see this as further proof that Akhundzada’s leadership is making Afghanistan’s global isolation worse.”
Diplomatically, the arrest warrants could complicate any efforts by the Taliban to gain international legitimacy. The United Nations Security Council recently reaffirmed that Afghanistan’s return to the global community depends on respecting women’s rights. If the ICC proceeds with charges, member states will likely face increased pressure to take a firmer stance against the Taliban’s leadership.
“The indictment won’t immediately change conditions for Afghan women,” Worden noted. “But it adds another layer of isolation for the Taliban and makes it harder for them to achieve diplomatic recognition.”
Meanwhile, human rights groups warn that the Taliban may retaliate against women in response to the ICC’s move. Taliban have a history of tightening restrictions when facing external pressure, raising concerns that conditions for Afghan women could deteriorate even further.
Beyond the ICC’s legal action, there are growing calls for the international community to do more to support Afghan women. Advocates argue that governments engaging with the Taliban should condition diplomatic relations on specific improvements in women’s rights and that sanctions should be expanded to target individual Taliban leaders involved in gender persecution.
“The world must move beyond statements of condemnation,” Ahmadi said. “We need stronger diplomatic measures, targeted sanctions, and a coordinated effort to amplify the voices of Afghan women in global decision-making.”
