{"id":159561,"date":"2026-05-22T13:54:23","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T11:54:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/?p=159561"},"modified":"2026-05-22T13:54:25","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T11:54:25","slug":"why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html","title":{"rendered":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Words like \u201cunusual\u201d, \u201cdangerous\u201d, \u201cbetrayal\u201d are being used by NGOs monitoring the International Criminal Court (ICC)<\/a>, in a highly critical response to an announcement<\/a> that there will be no ICC investigation into alleged atrocity crimes in Nigeria. The ICC \u201cis not intended to replace national courts\u201d, agrees Alice Banens from Amnesty International<\/a>, but it is \u201cintended to step up\u201d when national courts are not holding accountable those responsible. \u201cIn Nigeria, over 15 years have passed without justice,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2020, the office of the prosecutor declared<\/a> that there was sufficient evidence to open an investigation into the situation in Nigeria, following a ten-year preliminary examination. What was expected was that the prosecutor would have asked the judges for permission to open an investigation propriu motu<\/em> \u2013 which enables him to act where the court has jurisdiction. This declaration was one of former prosecutor Fatou Bensouda\u2019s last acts before handing over to Karim Khan in 2020. Both Nigeria and Ukraine were then in the same position \u2013 on the verge of a full investigation \u2013 expecting the new prosecutor to deliver.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Nigeria\u2019s case, this would be based on the prosecutor\u2019s analysis that, despite a number of trials of Boko Haram members and other Islamic groups\u2019 members as a result of the insurgency in the country\u2019s north east, those tried were \u201clow level perpetrators\u201d and there was not sufficient commitment by the authorities into investigating and prosecuting alleged crimes by their own forces: \u201cwhere proceedings are asserted to have been conducted, the information available did not demonstrate any tangible, concrete, and progressive steps by the authorities to address allegations against members of the NSF [Nigerian Security Forces],\u201d says Chuka Arinze-Onyia, who has worked as a criminal defence lawyer in Nigeria, and is now teaching at Griffith University in Australia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEncourage domestic proceedings\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

However, nearly six years on, the office of the prosecutor announced that rather than an investigation, they had signed a memorandum of understanding with the authorities in Abuja<\/a>, under which Nigeria would conduct its own investigations and prosecutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nevertheless, our \u201cposition and legal assessment of 2020 have not changed\u201d, says Mame Ndiaye Niang, deputy prosecutor, in a written response to questions from Justice Info. Especially with regard to \u201callegations concerning members of the Nigerian Armed Forces, the Office expects further progress,\u201d he says. \u201cThe Office is using the tools available under the Rome Statute to encourage domestic proceedings, while exercising vigilance and preserving the possibility of further action if necessary.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How did the ICC come to this position? \u201cAmongst the factors that guides [sic] its assessment, the Office looks at whether there are national proceedings, whether those proceedings are genuine, and whether continued engagement may advance accountability,\u201d says Niang. For Nigeria, he outlines \u201csustained and constructive engagement (\u2026) over several years\u201d, including \u201cinformation on domestic proceedings\u201d. However, he says, \u201cthis does not mean that the Office has concluded that all concerns have been resolved\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA very unusual procedural step\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The signature of the memorandum of understanding follows a failed attempt<\/a> by NGOs representing victims to engage judges of the ICC pre-trial chamber in requiring the prosecutor to make the call. The judges \u201cunfortunately decided that they lacked \u2018the power\u2019 to examine the matter,\u201d says Banens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Valerie Gabard, co-director of the NGO UpRights<\/a>, was one of the authors of the legal analysis<\/a> on behalf of several victims\u2019 associations in northern Nigeria, including the Jire Dole Mothers and the Knifar Movement networks, on which the NGOs based their claim. Gabard describes what has now happened with Nigeria as \u201ca very unusual procedural step, currently outside of the framework of the statute of the ICC\u201d. The potential results from ICC preliminary examinations are binary, she says:\u00a0\u201ceither you have enough to meet the criteria to proceed with an investigation or not. If the criteria are met, the prosecutor \u2018should\u2019 proceed with an investigation - that\u2019s the language of Article 15 of the Rome Statute\". If, however, the criteria have not been met, the prosecutor \u201chas to close the preliminary examination\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this case, \u201cafter 10 years of preliminary examination, the prosecutor concluded in an official statement that the criteria were met to proceed with the investigation\u201d. Gabard notes as an \u201cautomatic step\u201d that an investigation is usually opened within a few days. \u201cTo some degree,\u201d she continues, \u201cthe prosecutors have created a third situation that is not envisaged by the rules\u201d and which is side-stepping the usual procedures.<\/p>\n\n\n\t

\r\n\t\t
FIND THIS ARTICLE INTERESTING?<\/div>\r\n\t\t
\r\n\t\t\tSign up now for our (free) newsletter<\/a> to make sure you don't miss out on other publications of this type. \t\t<\/div>\r\n\t<\/div>\r\n\t\n\n\n

A \u201cviolation\u201d of the Rome Statute<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOne of the consequences of closing a preliminary examination officially is that it triggers some obligations of information from the prosecutor to the victims and communities that have provided information,\u201d Gabard says. Here, you are in a situation where the victims are not informed about the situation. And at the same time, no step has been taken to pursue an investigation. So that creates a limbo.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cHaving reviewed the language of the prosecutor since 2020, I think they sometimes have trouble figuring out which procedural step they are in,\u201d she adds. \u201cSometimes they are saying that they closed the preliminary examination. At the same time in administrative documents, Nigeria is still classified as a preliminary examination. In the memorandum, they do not deny that the criteria for opening an investigation were met. But at the same time, they state that they have taken the decision not to request the opening of an investigation to give a chance to Nigeria to address those crimes. So, they are confirming that they are in this kind of limbo\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Banens, it is more than a limbo : it is a \u201cviolation\u201d of the Rome Statute. She points out that in a different case earlier this year, judges<\/a> emphatically decided that ending the preliminary examination with the conclusion that an investigation is warranted actually obliges the prosecutor to present an application to the pre-trial chamber. \u201cIt could not be clearer, she says: the prosecutor having reached such positive conclusion in the situation of Nigeria in December 2020, it has the obligation<\/em> to request the opening of an investigation, and it has been directly violating its obligation under the Rome Statute for over six years.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What\u2019s next?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

As Gabard pointed out, closing a preliminary examination means that the prosecution must inform those who submitted information about the basis on which they made their decision. Niang says that \u201cduring his visits in Nigeria, [he] has had meetings with civil society organisations\u201d to whom he conveyed the position of the Office. \u201cThe Office intends to continue informing the public through further engagements. The Office is also considering organising a specific meeting with the victims and the affected community in Nigeria,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Banens counters: \u201cThe office of the prosecutor is not making genuine efforts to reach out directly to affected communities or victims\u2019 networks in northeast Nigeria\u201d.  \u201cEvery time they visit Nigeria, they remain in the capital Abuja and spend most of their time in meetings with Nigerian authorities,\u201d she notes. \u201cTo Amnesty\u2019s best knowledge, they have not set foot ever in Maiduguri [northeastern Nigeria]. Their public communications through press releases also remain very few over the years and have failed to provide any clarity on the prosecutor\u2019s position and intentions. The latest news of this memorandum fits in that context and does not give any more clarity\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe don\u2019t intend to open an office in Nigeria,\u201d Niang confirms. \u201cThe current approach is focused on supporting national proceedings and monitoring progress.\u201d Banens sees the memorendum as bringing \u201cnothing new\u201d: \u201cHigh level Boko Haram members and the Nigerian military are not being investigated or prosecuted in Nigeria, and the situation of Nigeria before the ICC is still in the same unlawful limbo state that it has been for over five years.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Nigeria\u2019s case, the principle of \u2018complementarity\u2019 has also been evoked as being \u201cnot secondary to the ICC\u2019s mandate\u201d, but as Niang puts it, \u201cat the heart\u201d of it\u201d. For Banens, \u201cthe Office\u2019s continued discourse on the importance of complementarity, in the case of Nigeria, is misplaced and it is a betrayal to those looking up to the ICC for justice\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Monitoring mechanisms<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Justice Info asked about the six-monthly assessments mentioned in the memorandum, and what criteria would be used to decide whether or not the authorities are independently investigating, including alleged crimes by the Nigeria armed forces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Niang replied: \u201cThe memorandum establishes joint action planning, periodic reviews and follow-up visits. Through this framework, the Office will be able to assess progress over time. (\u2026) The ultimate objective is accountability. What matters is that justice is delivered, whether at the national or international level. If the memorandum contributes to credible domestic proceedings, then it advances the purpose of the Rome Statute system. If it does not, the Office retains the prerogative to reassess its position.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMy main concern,\u201d says Gabard, is \u201cwhether this is enough pressure, and how will we know what would be the threshold? They say in the memorandum that they keep the prerogative to request the opening of investigation. But, what\u2019s the trade-off? What kind of monitoring system? There were years of preliminary investigation, where the ICC already said it was monitoring what\u2019s happening. I think it would be very important to have some transparency here in this monitoring process\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A political and strategic decision?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe criteria for their choice of situations now are unclear,\u201d believes Arinze-Onyia, who met with some of those working within the office of the prosecutor, when he did advocacy on Nigeria for Amnesty International. He points to the office\u2019s annual budget submission, earlier this decade, when they said could not move forward with the concluded preliminary examinations \u201cbecause we don\u2019t have the budget for it\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Justice Info specifically asked the deputy prosecutor Niang if the decision to not go ahead with the investigations was cost-based. \u201cNo\u201d was the reply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But politics may matter more than cost: Arinze-Onyia notes that Nigeria, \u201cis still considered a very big power in Africa\u201d. \u201cIf the ICC pursues an investigation, I suspect Nigeria would drop out from the Rome Statute. And if Nigeria should threaten to withdraw, it could have an effect across most of West Africa. So, the decision not to open an investigation, could, in fact be strategic,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gabard\u2019s biggest concern \u201cis that the prosecutor is creating a situation where there is no scrutiny. And no right for the victims and the parties, nor the pretrial chamber, to address the situation and ask whether it fits in the framework of the rules\u201d. If an investigation were opened, judges would be involved, and there would be \u201csome kind of obligation for the prosecutor of transparency and respect of the rights of the victim to be informed\u201d, she says, while the current situation \u201cis allowing the prosecutor to proceed without a framework\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Her concerns are shared by Banens who believes \u201cthe Office of the Prosecutor has set a dangerous precedent in Nigeria\u201d: \u201cUnder the excuse of complementarity, the Office is preventing the ICC from being the last resort avenue for justice for victims of crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in northeast Nigeria\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n

\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t
Recommended reading<\/div>\r\n\t\t\t
\"At<\/div><\/a>\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\tThe ICC on Nigeria: Years of words, but no action\r\n\t\t<\/a>\r\n\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":79,"featured_media":159554,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[562],"tags":[],"ji_location":[2383],"class_list":["post-159561","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-icc","ji_location-nigeria"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nWhy is the ICC burying the Nigeria case<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"JusticeInfo.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-22T11:54:23+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-05-22T11:54:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"799\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"janderson\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@janethanderson\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@justiceinfonet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"janderson\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"AnalysisNewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"janderson\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/28784f9ef986d3631dded75f4d7d63ac\"},\"headline\":\"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-22T11:54:23+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-22T11:54:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\"},\"wordCount\":1908,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"ICC\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\",\"name\":\"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-22T11:54:23+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-22T11:54:25+00:00\",\"description\":\"After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":799,\"caption\":\"A man digs graves for victims and members of the Islamist group Boko Haram in a cemetery in Maiduguri, in north-eastern Nigeria. In 2020, the ICC prosecutor stated that she had sufficient evidence to open an investigation into crimes committed in the region, but her successor has continued to postpone the launch of the investigation ever since. Photo: \u00a9 Pius Utomi Ekpei \/ AFP\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/\",\"name\":\"JusticeInfo.net\",\"description\":\"For justice to be done, it must be seen\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Justice Info\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"width\":1199,\"height\":1200,\"caption\":\"Justice Info\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"janderson\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/x.com\/janethanderson\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/auteur\/janderson\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case","description":"After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case","og_description":"After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html","og_site_name":"JusticeInfo.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","article_published_time":"2026-05-22T11:54:23+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-05-22T11:54:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":799,"url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"janderson","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case","twitter_creator":"@janethanderson","twitter_site":"@justiceinfonet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"janderson","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"AnalysisNewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html"},"author":{"name":"janderson","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/28784f9ef986d3631dded75f4d7d63ac"},"headline":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case","datePublished":"2026-05-22T11:54:23+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-22T11:54:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html"},"wordCount":1908,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg","articleSection":["ICC"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html","name":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg","datePublished":"2026-05-22T11:54:23+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-22T11:54:25+00:00","description":"After many years of waiting, victims in Nigeria have now been told that the International Criminal Court is shirking its responsibility in the situation. It is referring the case to the local authorities whose approach favours the use of force over justice, a stance reinforced by recent support from the US.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Nigeria_grave-digger-Islamists-cementery_@Pius-Utomi-Ekpei-AFP.jpg","width":1200,"height":799,"caption":"A man digs graves for victims and members of the Islamist group Boko Haram in a cemetery in Maiduguri, in north-eastern Nigeria. In 2020, the ICC prosecutor stated that she had sufficient evidence to open an investigation into crimes committed in the region, but her successor has continued to postpone the launch of the investigation ever since. Photo: \u00a9 Pius Utomi Ekpei \/ AFP"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/159561-why-is-the-icc-burying-the-nigeria-case.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Why is the ICC burying the Nigeria case"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/","name":"JusticeInfo.net","description":"For justice to be done, it must be seen","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization","name":"Justice Info","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","width":1199,"height":1200,"caption":"Justice Info"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA"]},{"@type":"Person","name":"janderson","sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/janethanderson"],"url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/auteur\/janderson"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159561","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/79"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=159561"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159561\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":159565,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159561\/revisions\/159565"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/159554"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159561"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159561"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159561"},{"taxonomy":"ji_location","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ji_location?post=159561"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}