The International Criminal Court (ICC) is preparing for a pivotal moment in its institutional development: the election of six new judges at the twenty-fifth session of the Assembly of States Parties, scheduled from December 7 to 17, 2026. This electoral process represents far more than a routine appointment procedure—it embodies the Court's unwavering commitment to upholding the highest standards of judicial integrity and ethical conduct on the global stage. To achieve this objective, the ICC has activated a sophisticated vetting mechanism centered on a confidential channel designed to identify any potential misconduct among candidates.
The cornerstone of this rigorous selection process is found within the Rome Statute, the foundational treaty that established the International Criminal Court. Article 36, paragraph 3(a) of this governing document establishes explicit and non-negotiable criteria for judicial office, mandating that judges must be chosen exclusively from individuals who demonstrate high moral character, impartiality and integrity. Furthermore, candidates must possess professional qualifications equivalent to those required for appointment to the highest judicial offices within their respective national legal systems. These requirements reflect the international community's recognition that the Court's legitimacy depends fundamentally on the personal and professional excellence of its judges.
To translate these constitutional principles into practical reality, the Assembly of States Parties instituted a permanent due diligence procedure through resolution ICC-ASP/22/Res.3. This comprehensive framework creates a structured methodology for evaluating candidates that extends far beyond traditional assessments of legal expertise and professional experience. The procedure's paragraph 12 explicitly empowers the Independent Oversight Mechanism (IOM)—a specialized subsidiary body of the Assembly—to establish and operate a confidential channel for receiving allegations of misconduct against any individual nominated for judicial office.
The scope of what constitutes misconduct under this procedure is deliberately broad and comprehensive, reflecting the serious responsibilities inherent in international judicial service. According to paragraph 11 of the due diligence framework, misconduct encompasses human rights violations of any nature, workplace incidents involving harassment, including sexual harassment, abuse of authority, discrimination, and bullying. The definition further extends to encompass other grave ethical or legal breaches such as fraud or corruption. This expansive definition ensures that the IOM can identify and investigate patterns of behavior that might compromise a candidate's ability to serve with the impartiality and integrity that the Rome Statute demands.
The operational mechanics of this confidential channel are designed to maximize both accessibility for reporters and protection for all parties involved. The IOM will accept submissions through a dedicated email address until May 31, 2026, establishing a clear deadline that allows sufficient time for comprehensive investigation and careful deliberation before the December elections. This timeline ensures that any substantiated concerns can be properly evaluated and factored into the election process.
Nominating States Parties bear significant responsibilities under this procedure, as outlined in paragraph 13 of the resolution. These states must ensure that organizations where candidates have previously worked or are currently employed receive detailed information about the confidential channel and understand precisely how allegations will be processed and evaluated. Crucially, this communication must note that the individual is under consideration as a judicial candidate at the ICC. This requirement creates a delicate but essential balance between organizational transparency and individual confidentiality, enabling relevant institutions to share pertinent information while maintaining the integrity of the vetting process.
Throughout every stage of this procedure, confidentiality remains absolutely paramount. The IOM treats all allegations, supporting documentation, and review processes with the utmost discretion, ensuring fundamental fairness to both candidates and those submitting information. This rigorous confidentiality serves multiple purposes: it encourages good-faith reporting by protecting whistleblowers from potential retaliation, prevents premature public judgment that could irreparably damage reputations, and maintains the dignity of the judicial selection process.
The list of nominated candidates is publicly available on the official webpage of the Assembly of States Parties, providing transparency to the international community and allowing civil society organizations, legal professionals, and other stakeholders to understand who is being considered for these influential positions. This strategic transparency demonstrates the Court's commitment to open governance while carefully protecting the confidentiality of the vetting process itself.
The December 2026 election represents a watershed moment for the ICC as it continues to evolve and strengthen its institutional framework in response to growing demands for accountability in international justice. By implementing such thorough due diligence measures, the Court sends a powerful message about its dedication to the rule of law and the highest ethical standards. The process recognizes that judicial integrity is not merely desirable but absolutely fundamental to the Court's legitimacy, effectiveness, and ultimate success in prosecuting international crimes.
For individuals or organizations seeking additional information about the procedure, the IOM maintains an accessible communication channel through its designated email address. This accessibility ensures that potential reporters fully understand the process, requirements, and protections before submitting information, thereby maximizing the quality and relevance of submissions.
The ICC's innovative approach reflects broader evolutionary trends in international governance, where sophisticated transparency and accountability mechanisms are increasingly recognized as essential components of legitimate and effective institutions. By creating clear, confidential pathways for reporting legitimate concerns while maintaining strict procedural safeguards, the Court successfully navigates the complex balance between thorough due process and meaningful public accountability.
As the May 31, 2026 deadline approaches, the IOM will begin its meticulous work of reviewing any submissions, conducting follow-up inquiries where necessary, and preparing comprehensive reports to inform the election process. The insights gained through this confidential review will prove invaluable in ensuring that the six judges elected in December truly embody the highest standards of judicial excellence, moral character, and ethical conduct that the Rome Statute envisions and the international community demands.