NUREMBERG, Germany -- Nobel Peace Prize laureate and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has sharply criticized sanctions against judges of the International Criminal Court, calling such political pressure on the judiciary "absolutely shocking." Speaking to Nikkei in an exclusive interview on Thursday, the day before Pillay was announced as the recipient of this year's peace prize, the South African jurist nevertheless said international efforts to pursue justice and accountability had made "great progress" over the decades.

Pillay was in Nuremberg for events organized by the the International Nuremberg Principles Academy for the 80th anniversary of the Nuremberg trials. Edited excerpts from the interview follow. Q: Eighty years after the Nuremberg judgment, has international criminal justice advanced or retreated?

There was a 50-year gap after Nuremberg when nothing happened internationally. We have to remember how slowly these things work. Then the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was established in 1993, followed by the Rwanda Tribunal in 1994. Once those two ad hoc tribunals started, there was great progress.

Now we have remedies and can take action. Issues can be raised in the Human Rights Council, and there are almost 60 independent experts who can enter a country, investigate and report to the council. We also have the Universal Periodic Review. Who would have thought that countries would agree to have their human rights records investigated and reported before the Human Rights Council? If you had asked me years ago, I would have said they would never allow it. But they have all agreed to it. I have seen great progress. This is a process towards justice and accountability.

Q: Was your experience under apartheid the starting point for your commitment to international law and human rights?

From my own experience of growing up under apartheid, the laws were terrible. They demonized Black people and treated us as if we were criminals just because we were dark. Racialism was institutionalized in the laws.

I started thinking: What kind of laws are these? They are immoral. Is there not a higher standard that we can look up to? That is why I started looking at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, later, the African Charter on Human Rights. Human rights gave me the answer.

I spent 30 years as a lawyer fighting apartheid. After our liberation, I learned that my name had been placed on an assassination list. No male lawyer in the white firms would take me on because of the color of my skin, so I became the first woman to start her own practice. Even some male Indian colleagues told me that I was very presumptuous to open an office of my own, because women could not manage a law office.

I was able to go to university because my high school principal sent teachers into our poor community to raise funds for me. With the help of the community, I went to university and later obtained other bursaries on the basis of my results.

Q: How do you view the current pressure on international criminal justice, including U.S. sanctions against ICC judges?

It is very, very concerning when one rich and powerful country can impose sanctions against judges. Judges are being sanctioned because some governments do not like judicial orders that affect their friends, while they do not object when similar measures are directed at their enemies.

Sanctioning judges for their lawful orders is unheard-of. You do not expect a country that calls itself a democracy to do that. There have not been enough voices condemning it.

The sanctions against the judges are very far-reaching. They cannot use credit cards, because the transactions come under the domain of servers in the United States. Their children's accounts can be frozen if they are studying in the United States. It is extremely insulting, embarrassing, hurtful and frightening.

This is not merely theoretical. It is affecting the judges now, and it is interference with the independence of the judiciary. It is absolutely shocking behavior for a democracy to go after judges, and there should be many more voices condemning it.

Q: A U.N. commission on which you served concluded that genocide was being committed in Gaza.

The importance of our report, which states that it is genocide, is that it is based on all the evidence. We do not simply use the term. It is very difficult to prove genocide in a court of law.

You must follow the evidence. The evidence has to be reliable, tested and verified. Facts are important. Whether it is for a court or for a newspaper, whatever you report, you have to set out the facts and not make anything up.

Normally, we stop short and say that the evidence indicates that a court should examine the matter. But in this case, we went so far as to say that genocide is being committed.

There are two situations the whole world is watching: Ukraine and Gaza. The United States and Europe are very ready to take action against President [Vladimir] Putin. They want an arrest warrant for Putin, and they want to establish a tribunal for the crime of aggression in relation to Ukraine. Why does Europe not establish a tribunal for aggression in relation to Israel and the United States? That is why I have spoken about double standards, which we should not accept. We should point them out, even to Europe. Q: How do you see the future of the United Nations and international criminal justice?

I always try to remain positive. Of course, I become distressed just like anyone else, and I criticize what is happening to the ICC judges. But while criticizing it, I remain positive because we have to look for strategies to counter it. We have to find ways of building enough support among states and among our own populations.

I do not give up, because I have such faith in young people. They will not tolerate this pushback completely, and civil society will not allow it. People fought very hard to get here and to secure the protection of rights.

During President [Donald] Trump's first term, I gave lectures at U.S. universities. American students were very emotional and depressed. I told them it was not a straight downward path. The U.N. movement has its ups and downs. Sometimes you think you are going to lose it, and then something happens and you regain it.

People cannot be silenced for long. Not the new generations. They have their own journalists, their thinkers and their teachers. That is what gives me hope.