Amnesty International has documented unlawful Israeli actions, such as indiscriminate attacks, amid the intensification of Israeli military operations in Gaza. These actions have caused considerable harm to civilians and should be thoroughly investigated for possible war crimes. A war crime is a serious violation of the laws and customs of war, which are intended to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities during armed conflicts. These violations can include actions like targeting civilians intentionally, using prohibited weapons, or causing excessive harm to individuals or property. War crimes can be prosecuted under international law, such as the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and those responsible can be held accountable for their actions.
The Amnesty International conducted interviews with survivors and eyewitnesses conducted an analysis of satellite imagery, and verified photos and videos to examine the air bombardments conducted by Israeli forces. These attacks resulted in extensive destruction and, in certain instances, the tragic loss of entire families. In each of these instances, Israeli actions contravened international humanitarian law. This included a failure to take reasonable precautions to protect civilians, engaging in indiscriminate attacks that did not differentiate between civilians and military targets, and potentially targeting civilian objects.
In their expressed determination to eliminate Hamas, Israeli forces have demonstrated a shocking disregard for the lives of civilians. They have systematically demolished entire residential neighborhoods, resulting in a significant loss of civilian lives and the destruction of vital infrastructure. Simultaneously, new restrictions have placed Gaza on the brink of running out of essential resources such as water, medicine, fuel, and electricity. Testimonies from eyewitnesses and survivors repeatedly emphasize how Israeli attacks have devastated Palestinian families, leaving surviving relatives with nothing but rubble as a memory of their loved ones.
According to Amnesty International report, there are five illegal attacks that targeted residential buildings, a refugee camp, a family home, and a public market. While the Israeli army asserts that its actions are directed solely at military targets, Amnesty International, in several instances, discovered no evidence of the presence of combatants or other military objectives in the vicinity during the attacks. Additionally, Amnesty International’s findings indicate that the Israeli military did not take all necessary precautions before these attacks, including providing effective advance warnings to Palestinian civilians. In some cases, civilians received no warnings at all, and in others, the warnings issued were insufficient.
This is war crime started by the Israel against the defenseless Palestinians. The internationally accepted rules of armed conflict stem from the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which have been ratified by all United Nations member states. These rules have evolved through decisions made at international war crimes tribunals and are collectively known as the “Law of Armed Conflict” or “International Humanitarian Law.” They apply to government forces, organized armed groups, and individuals involved in armed conflicts, including Hamas militants.
In cases where alleged perpetrators of atrocities in Israel or the occupied Palestinian territories are not prosecuted domestically, the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague serves as the primary international legal body to bring charges. Domestic courts can also use universal jurisdiction in war crimes cases, but this authority is limited in scope. The ICC, established by the Rome Statute, has the legal authority to investigate alleged crimes within its member states’ territories or committed by their nationals when domestic authorities are either unwilling or unable to do so.
The International Criminal Court, a permanent tribunal for prosecuting war crimes, was established in The Hague in 2002. It holds jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in its 123 member states or crimes committed by their nationals.
Notably, some major world powers such as China, the United States, Russia, India, and Egypt are not ICC members. The ICC recognizes Palestine as a member state, but Israel rejects the court’s jurisdiction and does not formally cooperate with it.
Despite facing budget and staff constraints, ICC prosecutors are currently investigating 17 cases spanning from Ukraine and Afghanistan to Sudan and Myanmar. For the year 2023, the ICC has allocated just under a million euros ($1.06 million) for investigations in the Palestinian territories and is seeking additional resources.
Since 2021, the ICC has been conducting an ongoing investigation into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the occupied Palestinian territories. This includes actions in the territory that Israel refers to as “the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War in June 1967,” comprising the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, as well as crimes committed by Palestinian nationals in Israel. This includes the leaders of both Hamas and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
The ongoing attacks on Gaza have raised the possibility of various charges related to war crimes and crimes against humanity. These allegations encompass acts such as murder, hostage-taking, sexual violence, persecution, starvation, deliberate targeting of civilians and their infrastructure, as well as armed attacks that disproportionately harm innocent civilians.
Despite the welcome assurance by Prosecutor Khan that his office will use a consistent standard to evaluate these atrocity crimes within the court’s jurisdiction, there is limited evidence of the investigation gaining momentum. It is important to note that while the ICC alone cannot bring about peace, or quickly detain multiple individuals who may be subject to indictment, it has previously issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this year.
The ability of court officials to access Gaza or Israel remains uncertain. However, there is a wealth of open-source and satellite evidence that could potentially support the investigation.
The recent attacks in Palestine have once again given rise to concerns about bias and partiality. These concerns have tangible consequences, as double standards are not just morally objectionable but also counterproductive. To maintain global credibility, the same principles of human rights and international law must be applied consistently, whether in Brazil and South Africa or in Washington and Berlin.
For the ICC, moral authority plays a crucial role in achieving practical success. Following the evidence wherever it leads, even when it challenges that in power, is the very reason this court was established. Therefore, in the days ahead, Prosecutor Khan should make it clear that the ICC is allocating and seeking additional resources to advance its investigation and build robust cases against those most responsible for the alleged crimes.
