About the author(s):
Pascal Turlan is an international lawyer and accountability expert with 25 years of experience in international criminal law, human rights law, and international cooperation. He works as an independent expert in Ukraine and Bangladesh and teaches at Sciences Po Paris and the French Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature. From 2022 to 2025, he was Legal and Program Director at Project Expedite Justice, where he led the legal strategy on accountability for international crimes committed in Ukraine. Prior to that, he held a range of senior roles for about 20 years at the International Criminal Court, culminating in his appointment as Head of Judicial Cooperation of the Office of the Prosecutor. Holdings Masters from the Europa College of Bruges and Sciences Po Paris, he also worked for the setting up of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the French Ministry of Justice, Médecins sans Frontières and Médecins du Monde.
This post forms part of the Wagner Symposium hosted by the Armed Groups and International Law blog. The introductory post can be found here. The symposium seeks to foster deeper discussion on how best to address the Wagner Group and its affiliated entities.
Since its creation and in the context of its successive or parallel deployments to various parts of the world, members of the Wagner Group have been repeatedly accused of committing crimes that could amount to “the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole” (see here and here), as mentioned in the Preamble of the Rome Statute (RS) of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The serious crimes, over which the ICC has jurisdiction, are the crimes of genocide (Art. 6 RS), crimes against humanity (Art. 7), war crimes (Art. 8), and, under certain additional conditions, the crime of aggression (Art. 8 bis). The public allegations relating to the known activities and modus operandi of the Wagner Group since it appeared in 2014 and of its personnel, operatives, associates or former members who may have been incorporated into different entities that may have replaced the Wagner Group since (Wagner Group members or personnel), might indicate the commission of at least war crimes and crimes against humanity (see here, here and here,).
If United Nations Member States who repeatedly affirmed, since at least May 1993, that “widespread and flagrant violations of international humanitarian law […] constitute a threat to international peace and security” and that “effective measures to bring to justice the persons who are responsible for them […] will contribute to ensuring that such violations are halted and effectively redressed” want to live up to the promise of fighting impunity and providing judicial accountability for the gravest international crimes, and if they are serious about answering the expectations of the victims, as was the pledge of the international community when it adopted the Rome Statute on 17 July 1998, the perpetrators of these crimes must be brought before the adequate criminal jurisdictions for justice to be done. The thousands of victims concerned are entitled to justice, protection and reparation. Lack of judicial accountability feeds the cycles of violence and encourages their perpetuation. Crimes of such magnitude threaten the very foundations of the societies where they are committed and the very survival of their population. They threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world. Prosecuting their authors is a sine qua non condition to ensuring some peace and stability are possible.
The ICC is a complementary Court that will only prosecute cases when States are not doing it or appear unwilling or unable to do it genuinely. Thus, the primary responsibility to prosecute such crimes lies with the States, whether they are a party to the Rome Statute or not, as the RS Preamble reemphasizes. In light of the current obstacles confronting the national Courts in most of the countries where Wagner Group forces are currently deployed with the agreement of local authorities, or where relevant judicial authorities do not have access to the suspects (Ukraine), and given the reported webs of interactions and vested interests between these forces and some local authorities, it is doubtful that the national jurisdictions in these countries will open investigations or prosecutions against Wagner Group members. In two successive posts, I therefore seek to highlight the main facts relating to a possible investigation of the crimes committed by the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC (ICC-OTP or OTP), focusing successively on the ICC jurisdiction for such crimes (1) and the parameters of a possible investigation by the OTP (2), and concluding briefly on the actual challenges that might impede an ICC Wagner case in the current context (3).
- The ICC has jurisdiction over the crimes alleged
Considering the absence of actual known investigations of the crimes allegedly committed by Wagner Group forces in their areas of deployment and of any prosecution so far, the ICC would appear to be the most relevant and appropriate jurisdiction to turn to, to address such crimes. In the absence of actual investigations by the competent national criminal jurisdictions, which have primary responsibility to do so, or by any hybrid, regional or international tribunal, the only available jurisdiction to try individuals committing such crimes would be the ICC.
The Court may exercise jurisdiction in a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes (as well as the crime of aggression, which is not dealt with in this post) were committed on or after 1 July 2002, either by a national or on the territory of a State Party to the ICC, or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court; or when the crimes were referred to the ICC Prosecutor by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) pursuant to a resolution adopted under chapter VII of the UN Charter.
Material jurisdiction
As alluded to above, it is reasonable to believe that alleged incidents involving Wagner Group personnel on the territory of several State parties to the ICC, where an international armed conflict is ongoing such as Ukraine, or where non international armed conflicts are taking place, such as the Central African Republic (CAR), Mali, Libya or Sudan, could constitute war crimes and, in some cases, crimes against humanity.
Regarding only the non-international armed conflicts, based on the multiple public reports that emerged over the last years, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 or other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, listed as war crimes under Art. 8 (2) RS, seem to have been committed that would fall under the ICC material jurisdiction. We can mention at least the crimes of violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture, outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, and rape.
It is also likely that some of the incidents reported involving acts of murder, imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law, torture, rape, other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health would be part of widespread or systematic attacks against a civilian population therefore constitute crimes against humanity under Art. 7 RS. This is most likely the case in the situation in Mali for instance.
Temporal jurisdiction
Allegations of crimes by Wagner Group members on the territory or by nationals of States that were already parties to the ICC in 2014 would fall squarely under the ICC jurisdiction. Several States where the presence of the Wagner Group has been confirmed were parties to the ICC already at that date, including the CAR, Mali, Niger, which are all State Parties since the start of the Court’s jurisdiction on 1 July 2002, and Burkina Faso, a Party since 16 April 2004. Madagascar, where Wagner Group is presumed to be present is also a State Party since 14 March 2008.
Personal and territorial jurisdiction
The ICC would therefore have jurisdiction for crimes committed by members or associates of the Wagner Group on the territory of all these States parties, irrespective of the nationality of the alleged perpetrators, including if they are nationals of non-State parties.
In the same way, it is submitted that the ICC would also have jurisdiction for crimes that would be committed by Wagner Group forces on the territory of Libya and on parts of the territory of Sudan. While neither Libya nor Sudan is a State party to the ICC, the situations on their territory, or parts thereof, were referred by the UNSC acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
On 31 March 2005, the UNSC referred the situation in the Sudan western region of Darfur to the ICC in Resolution 1593 (2005). On this basis, the ICC may exercise its jurisdiction over crimes committed on the territory of Darfur from 1 July 2002 onwards.
On 26 February 2011, the UNSC unanimously referred the situation in Libya since 15 February 2011 to the ICC in its Resolution 1970 (2011), giving the ICC jurisdiction over crimes committed on the territory of Libya or by its nationals from 15 February 2011 onwards. In addition, on 12 May 2025, Libya accepted the ICC jurisdiction for crimes committed between 2011 and the end of 2027.
While the Wagner Group was not present on these territories at the time of these referrals, the situations as referred to the ICC are open-ended and investigations on these territories might encompass crimes committed in recent years by the Group.
Finally, the ICC also has jurisdiction over crimes potentially committed by Wagner Group operatives on the territory of Ukraine since at least 2014. While Ukraine became a State party to the ICC only on 1 January 2025, it had previously twice accepted the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to an Art. 12(3) Declaration: The first declaration accepted ICC jurisdiction with respect to alleged crimes committed on Ukrainian territory from 21 November 2013 to 22 February 2014. The second declaration extended this time period to encompass ongoing alleged crimes committed throughout the territory of Ukraine from 20 February 2014 onwards.
Conversely, the ICC would not have jurisdiction for crimes committed in Mozambique or Cameroon, where some Wagner Group presence has also been reported, unless the UNSC would refer the situation in one or both territories, which is unlikely to happen at the moment, or in the specific circumstances where the crimes would have been committed by nationals of States parties members of Wagner operating on these territories.