When the International Criminal Court in March 2023 issued an arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin, it triggered a global question: if a sitting head of state indicted for alleged war crimes tries to travel, could he be detained? For many, the idea that any leader might be answerable to a global court looked like a historic advance for international justice.

And indeed, media coverage since then — from August 2025 speculation about a potential summit between Putin and US President Donald Trump in Alaska, to later discussions about a possible meeting in Europe — has repeatedly foregrounded the risk of arrest. Headlines such as “ICC arrest warrant for Putin limits where any summit … could take place" have made clear: for ICC-member states, the warrant is no small matter.

Similarly, his decision earlier in 2025 not to attend the BRICS Summit in Brazil was explicitly tied to the warrant: the Kremlin said the legal risk was too high.

Thus, any foreign trip by Putin becomes headline-news: Could this be the moment international justice catches up with him?

To understand why arrest remains unlikely in New Delhi, one must understand how the ICC works — and how it doesn’t.

The ICC was established under the Rome Statute of 1998. As of 2025, 125 countries have ratified the Statute and are considered “States Parties."

Crucially: only States Parties are legally obliged to cooperate with the ICC — including executing arrest warrants, surrendering indicted individuals, and exchanging evidence.

If a country is not a party to the Rome Statute, the ICC has no enforcement power on that country; the treaty does not bind........

© News18