The decision escalates a bitter dispute with the international community over the human rights situation in the East African country, which has seen more than a year of deadly violence after President Pierre Nkurunziza made a controversial decision to pursue a third term.
No state has withdrawn from the ICC, according to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court. The court prosecutes cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Ninety-four out of 110 Burundi lawmakers voted in favor of the withdrawal plan, months after the ICC announced it would investigate the country's ongoing violence.
Only Africans have been charged in the six cases that are ongoing or about to begin, though preliminary ICC investigations have been opened elsewhere in the world.
Of the 124 countries that are parties to the Rome Statute, 34 are African, the largest continental bloc. The United States is not a party to the treaty.
Burundi's decision is not immediate. Observers say a county wishing to withdraw from the ICC must write to the UN secretary-general stating its intention, and the withdrawal takes effect a year after the day the secretary-general receives the letter.
"Already, we have information that intelligence agents are torturing, killing Burundians behind closed doors," he said. "The world ought to rescue the people of Burundi."
Burundi's government has repeatedly said it is the victim of propaganda by exiles and opponents who want to diminish its credibility.
Hundreds have died in Burundi since Nkurunziza last year pursued and won a third term that many call unconstitutional. Since the ruling party announced his candidacy in April 2015, Burundi has seen violent street protests, forced disappearances and assassinations. More than 260,000 have fled.
The push among some African countries to withdraw from ICC began after the court indicted Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta on charges of crimes against humanity for 2007 post-election violence in which more than 1,000 died. The ICC prosecutor said threats to witnesses, bribery and lack of cooperation by Kenya's government led to the case's collapse. Some countries want a separate African court with jurisdiction over rights abuses.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
