ICC judge on what U.S. sanctions mean for her and global courts
ICC judge on what U.S. sanctions mean for her and global courts
国际刑事法院法官谈美国制裁对她及全球法院意味着什么
If you want to see how far U.S. sanctions can reach, ask Kimberly Prost’s Alexa. After the United States sanctioned her, the Canadian judge at the International Criminal Court began losing access to services from companies in different countries. Her credit cards were also canceled. 如果你想了解美国制裁的触角能延伸多远，问问金伯利·普罗斯特（Kimberly Prost）的亚马逊 Alexa 智能音箱就知道了。在美国对她实施制裁后，这位国际刑事法院（ICC）的加拿大籍法官开始无法使用来自不同国家的公司服务，她的信用卡也被注销了。
“You start to lose services from American companies, Amazon, Google, potentially Apple, whatever it may be,” she told Morning Edition. “Completely randomly, though, you don’t know when something’s going to happen.” One of those moments came during an ordinary moment at home. “I went home and Alexa wouldn’t talk to me,” she told NPR’s Steve Inskeep. “你开始失去美国公司的服务，比如亚马逊、谷歌，可能还有苹果，无论是什么，”她在接受《早间新闻》（Morning Edition）采访时说，“而且这完全是随机的，你根本不知道什么时候会发生什么。”其中一次就发生在她家里的普通时刻。“我回到家，Alexa 就不理我了，”她告诉 NPR 的史蒂夫·英斯基普（Steve Inskeep）。
Her credit cards, issued in the Netherlands and Canada, were canceled. She has managed to keep some bank accounts, but says her banking services are extremely limited and even small transfers can be blocked. The sanctions themselves are American. Still, businesses abroad may comply because they have ties to the U.S. “We have this massive overcompliance by companies,” she said. 她在荷兰和加拿大办理的信用卡被注销了。她虽然保住了一些银行账户，但表示自己的银行服务受到了极大限制，甚至连小额转账都可能被拦截。制裁本身虽然来自美国，但海外企业往往因为与美国有业务往来而选择配合。她说：“企业出现了这种大规模的过度合规现象。”
One of the most serious examples is her health insurance. Prost receives coverage through AXA, the French company that provides insurance for the court. She says the company has refused to pay her claims even though it is not legally required to follow the U.S. sanctions. “It’s a business decision,” she said. Her phone still works — “so far” — but some email, cloud and other technology services are limited. She has lived with the restrictions for more than a year. 最严重的例子之一是她的医疗保险。普罗斯特通过法国安盛集团（AXA）获得保险，该公司为法院提供保险服务。她说，尽管法律并未要求该公司遵守美国制裁，但该公司仍拒绝支付她的理赔申请。“这是一个商业决定，”她说。她的手机目前还能用——“到目前为止”——但一些电子邮件、云服务和其他技术服务受到了限制。她已经在这种限制下生活了一年多。
Prost said her sanction stems from Trump’s executive order targeting ICC officials involved in cases concerning Israel and Gaza or Afghanistan. Her own case goes back six years. At the time, Prost was temporarily serving on the ICC’s Appeals Chamber when prosecutors sought authorization to open an investigation into alleged crimes connected to the war in Afghanistan. Prost and four other judges unanimously approved the request. 普罗斯特表示，她受到的制裁源于特朗普签署的一项行政命令，该命令针对的是参与涉及以色列、加沙或阿富汗案件的国际刑事法院官员。她本人的案件可以追溯到六年前。当时，普罗斯特正在国际刑事法院上诉分庭临时任职，检察官寻求授权对阿富汗战争中涉嫌的罪行展开调查。普罗斯特和其他四名法官一致批准了这一请求。
The investigation covered alleged crimes involving the Taliban and ISIS and included what Prost described as “a small component related to the United States.” That U.S. component was never pursued and was later deprioritized by prosecutors, she said. “And it is for that decision that I’m sanctioned,” Prost said. 该调查涵盖了涉及塔利班和“伊斯兰国”（ISIS）的涉嫌罪行，并包含了普罗斯特所描述的“一小部分与美国有关的内容”。她说，那部分涉及美国的内容从未被追究，后来也被检察官降低了优先级。“而我正是因为那个决定而受到制裁，”普罗斯特说。
Her role was judicial, not investigative. She said the appeals judges were required to decide whether prosecutors had the proper legal basis and jurisdiction to proceed — similar, she said, to a judge authorizing a search warrant. “There is no investigation related to the American component in Afghanistan, and I have nothing to do with the Israel-Gaza situation,” Prost said. 她的角色是司法性的，而非调查性的。她说，上诉法官的任务是裁定检察官是否有适当的法律依据和管辖权来推进调查——她认为这类似于法官签发搜查令。“目前没有针对阿富汗境内美国相关部分的调查，我也与以色列-加沙局势毫无关系，”普罗斯特说。
For Prost, the broader concern is what sanctions like these mean for judges on international courts making decisions from the bench. “We are judges, and we are being told that rather than deciding our cases on the basis of the facts and the law before us, as we are duty bound to do, we’re being asked to decide the cases or not decide them in accordance with the wishes of the U.S. government,” she said. 对普罗斯特而言，更广泛的担忧是，此类制裁对于在法庭上做出裁决的国际法院法官意味着什么。“我们是法官，但我们被告知，我们不应根据事实和法律来裁决案件（这是我们的职责所在），而是被要求根据美国政府的意愿来决定是否审理案件，”她说。
By August 2026, nine of the court’s 18 judges were under U.S. sanctions, along with both deputy prosecutors, its former prosecutor and one staff member. The Trump administration has threatened to go further, announcing what it called a “whole-of-government campaign” to “systematically dismantle” the ICC over its investigations involving Americans and Israelis. 截至2026年8月，该法院18名法官中有9人受到美国制裁，此外还有两名副检察官、前任检察官和一名工作人员。特朗普政府威胁要采取进一步行动，宣布了一项所谓的“全政府行动”，旨在因国际刑事法院对美国人和以色列人的调查而“系统性地瓦解”该法院。
Prost is challenging the sanction in U.S. court. In June, she and fellow ICC judges Reine Alapini-Gansou and Solomy Balungi Bossa sued President Trump and other administration officials in federal court in New York, arguing that the measures were unlawful. 普罗斯特正在美国法院对制裁提出挑战。今年6月，她与国际刑事法院的同事雷内·阿拉皮尼-甘苏（Reine Alapini-Gansou）和索洛米·巴伦吉·博萨（Solomy Balungi Bossa）在纽约联邦法院起诉了特朗普总统及其他政府官员，主张这些制裁措施是非法的。
For now, the sanctions have changed how she lives outside the courtroom, but not the work she continues to do inside it. Her current case involves alleged crimes tied to the jihadist takeover of Timbuktu in Mali, including persecution, torture and inhumane treatment. “I will never quit my job as a judge,” Prost said. “These methods that they’re using, these coercive measures, are completely futile.” 目前，制裁改变了她在法庭之外的生活方式，但并没有改变她在法庭内继续从事的工作。她目前审理的案件涉及与圣战分子占领马里廷巴克图有关的涉嫌罪行，包括迫害、酷刑和不人道待遇。“我永远不会辞去法官的工作，”普罗斯特说，“他们使用的这些手段，这些强制措施，是完全徒劳的。”
She said she and other sanctioned judges and prosecutors continue to do their jobs “objectively, independently and in accordance with the oath that we’ve taken.” 她说，她和其他受到制裁的法官及检察官将继续“客观、独立并根据我们所宣誓的誓言”履行职责。