I. Individual Responsibility/Responsibility of Commanders

The OTP does not prosecute States at large, so in order for the OTP to bring charges forward, they must be attributed to one or more individuals who are liable for the crimes committed. In this case, Netanyahu and Gallant can be prosecuted in their capacity as government leaders during the situation. The Court has jurisdiction over Netanyahu through individual responsibility pursuant to Article 25(3)(b) of the Rome Statute.9 Article 25(3)(b) imposes responsibility and liability for punishment if the individual orders, solicits, or induces the commission of a crime that occurs or is attempted.10 Netanyahu has solicited and induced the commission of the ground invasion, blockade, and bombings.11 As leader, he has accepted foreign aid in the form of money and weapons that are used to carry out Israeli attacks. He also uses his authority in negotiations with foreign powers to garner international support for military actions, including those that have surpassed proportionality.

Moreover, Netanyahu satisfies the mental element component as well pursuant to Article 30, which requires intent and knowledge.12 He openly debriefs and informs the public of IDF plans and strategies during press conferences, demonstrating that he has knowledge of the aggressions and tactics. In one of his press conferences, for example, he informed the public of plans for over one million Gazan civilians to move to the south of the city prior to the planned ground invasion.13

Additionally, Netanyahu is operating with the intent for the IDF to strike Gaza and is aware of the consequences of those actions. He relays the information to the public regarding completed military actions, including those that have surpassed proportionality. He has affirmed on several occasions that Israel will not agree to a ceasefire despite calls to do so by the international community. This demonstrates that he is not only aware of the actions but plans for the IDF to continue bombing Gaza. More recently he stated that Israel plans to take indefinite security responsibility over the territory after the war, meaning that he intends for the IDF actions to culminate in at least some degree of political annexation of the territory.14 As evidenced by his active role in coordinating Israeli security and knowledge in military operations, Netanyahu is not simply complicit in the acts of the IDF, he is responsible.

Gallant can be held liable for crimes committed by the IDF through commander responsibility pursuant to Article 28(a). As Defense Minister he is within the chain of command and oversees Israeli forces through his role of protecting and securing Israel.15 Gallant therefore has intimate knowledge of intelligence for IDF operations because of his leadership. This would include awareness of military objectives, the impact of combat, the types of weapons used by the IDF as well as their execution targets. His knowledge is further evidenced by his participation in press conferences where he details military plans. For example, shortly after October 7th, he publicly stated “I have given an order” for a “complete siege of Gaza,” meaning that innocent civilians would be denied power, food, and fuel.16 Because of Gallant’s authority and position within the military chain of command, he is responsible for widespread and systematic crimes that occur under his leadership.

II. War Crimes

Compelling evidence exists sufficient to amount to war crimes committed by the Israeli army. The crimes elaborated upon the following analysis are not an exhaustive list of war crimes that Israeli leadership can be prosecuted for. Under Article 8(2)(b)(iv), the IDF can be found to have launched excessive attacks that go beyond military necessity. They have also employed the starvation of civilians through the blockade pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxv).

A. Excessive Civilian Attacks in Relation to Military Advantage

The Israeli aggression against Hamas has reached an unprecedented scale that transcends proportionality with respect to Israel’s right to self-defense under Article 8(2)(b)(iv). An argument can be made that press briefings from Israeli officials and the destruction of Gaza demonstrate Israel’s intent to conduct military operations in a manner causing overwhelming damage to civilians. Article 8 requires that the excessive damage to civilian life and/or objects be disproportionate to military advantage.17 The scale of death and loss of infrastructure in Gaza compared to Israel’s advancement in eradicating Hamas is one way of assessing proportionality. Netanyahu has publicly stated that Israel armed forces intend to eliminate Hamas and are working within the scope of international law to do so.18 However, press statements made by IDF Commanding Officer Daniel Hagari expressing an emphasis on “damage and not accuracy” speak to the contrary.19

Sources claim that as of November 2nd, the IDF dropped 25,000 tons of explosives onto the Gaza strip, an area spanning no more than 360 square kilometers.20 It is also estimated that the explosive force of the bombs dropped over Gaza is equivalent to that of two nuclear bombs.21 Israel’s incessant bombings, that only paused for a four-day ceasefire, have resulted in an estimated 18,000 Palestinian deaths.22 This statistic becomes more grave when considering the fact that about half of Palestine’s population are children.23 There are also 48,780 civilians who have been injured and have limited access to proper medical treatment.24 Yet, civilian deaths during conflicts do not in and of themselves amount to war crimes. It has been argued that the deaths of Palestinian civilians are casualties of war in an effort to eliminate extremely dangerous targets.

The principle of proportionality and necessity are at the crux of whether Israel’s actions can be successfully prosecuted as war crimes. The ICC does not have a set measurement of what is considered proportionate or necessary with respect to military advantage. As such, the assessment functions more like a balancing test, weighing the interests of weakening the opposition’s military while protecting civilians. State forces are within their right to target legitimate military objectives during conflict, but attacks meant to reach said objective may not be indiscriminate. In other words, the weapons used must be capable of being directed at the specific military objective.25

It can be argued that Israel has not been capable of directing its attacks specifically toward Hamas at least in part because 61% of those killed during the conflict have been civilians.26 Moreover, the bombs used to combat Hamas are being dropped throughout Gaza, decimating civilian infrastructure despite the fact that Hamas primarily operates through underground tunnels. It is confirmed that the IDF has bombed and destroyed U.N. facilities, schools, clinics, hospitals, and mosques including the oldest mosque in Gaza the Omari Mosque.27 The disconnect between the primary target and who is actually being killed or injured raises valid concerns with respect to proportionality.

It is estimated that Hamas has between 20,000 and 25,000 members and according to senior Israeli officials they have killed 5,000 militants as of December 6.28 The spokesperson stated that two civilians killed for every Hamas militant is a “tremendously positive ratio.”29 His data is in direct conflict with reports coming from Gaza’s Ministry of Health that put the death toll to 18,000. Regardless of whose data is accurate, the proportions of those killed during combat do not fully capture the number of Palestinians who are likely to die from the conflict, affecting proportionality. Gaza has been completely decimated, with reports by the U.N. calling it a humanitarian disaster zone.30 Disease is climbing in the region with reports of 60,000 cases of diarrhea in children under five and more than 160,000 cases of acute respiratory infections.31 Other emerging health concerns are scabies, chicken pox, and even meningitis. Due to the collapsed healthcare infrastructure, many of these illnesses could result in death. Despite not being killed directly by bombs, the deaths are still attributable to the Israel’s bombing campaign or siege and will therefore change the two to one ratio described by Israeli officials.

Even if an assessment was made using a strict numerical lens of those killed during combat, it is questionable to affirm that the death of two civilians for every one Hamas militant is proportionate. Comments by the IDF imply that the military knows and is fine with the deaths of 30,000 to 40,000 more civilians to achieve its goal of eliminating Hamas.32 In the history of the Court, the OTP investigated and charged Germain Katanga with war crimes for the deaths of 8000 civilians and the forced displacement of 600,000 people in response to a massacre perpetrated by the rival group Hemas.33 The number of civilian deaths known and accepted by both leaders during the respective military conflict are similar and validates concerns with respect to Israel’s use of force.

In the case of Ukraine and Russia, the OTP opened an investigation for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide less than a month after Russia’s invasion.34 Although the exact number of civilian casualties was unclear at the outset of the situation, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reported that from February 2022 to June 2023, the civilian death toll in Ukraine was 25,170.35 At the current rate of civilian loss as reported by Israel, the IDF’s actions will kill the same number of people in the time span of only four and a half months. The scale of civilian deaths in Gaza is in line with other OTP instigations and reflects grounds for a preliminary investigation of the IDF’s use of force. The sharp contrast between the number of successfully eliminated Hamas soldiers and civilians speaks to the disproportionate nature of Israeli attacks. Should numbers similar to other investigations be insufficient to question proportionality, there are other reasons to consider why the IDF’s actions are still not proportional.

Another element to consider for proportionality is the loss of Palestinian journalists during the conflict. Journalists and their families have been reportedly targeted and killed by the IDF.36 According the Associated Press, 72% of all media deaths worldwide this year have been of journalists covering the Israel–Hamas war, most of them being Palestinian journalists in the Gaza Strip.37 As of December 11, fifty-six Palestinian journalists and media workers were confirmed dead, eleven journalists were reported missing, and nineteen were reportedly arrested.38 It is worth noting that at least one journalist and several civilians were identified among the detained men who were stripped of their clothing and taken to an unspecified location by the IDF on December 8th.39 Journalists are afforded protections during armed conflicts under international law.40 Yet, Israel’s decentralized bombing of Gaza and possible targeting of journalists counters this protection. The result is that Palestinian journalists are being denied the right to share the events of the conflict from their perspective for fear of being killed. Other journalists will likely also be dissuaded from capturing the images and stories of what is unfolding on the ground because both civilians and journalists are being killed—a loss that tilts the scale of proportionality.

Lastly, Palestinians are being eviscerated at such a high rate that entire bloodlines have gone extinct. Since October 7th, forty-seven families consisting of 500 civilians were erased from Gaza’s civil registry.41 If those reports are proven true by the OTP, that means that no single member of a lineage of forty-seven families exists. This adds to the gravity of destruction that has emanated from Israel’s aggression. Admittedly, the IDF is working in conditions that make singling out Hamas difficult. Gaza is a densely populated territory with approximately two million residents before the current situation. The IDF is operating under the challenge of aiming to destabilize Hamas while Hamas exist in close proximity to Palestinian civilians and has used them as human shields.42 As one of the most advanced militaries in the world however, equipped with cutting edge surveillance technology, Israel has the means to change strategy and reduce the rate of civilian casualties.43 The difficulties of war do not exculpate Israel from its responsibility to honor international law. The unprecedented loss of Gaza’s civilian life, media, culture, and history is a serious consequence of the conflict that constitutes war crimes.

B. Intentional Starvation and Impediment of Relief Supplies

The IDF has also employed the use of starvation pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) through the implementation of a complete blockade of electricity, fuel, medical supplies, and water in Gaza.44 On October 9th, Israel’s Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced that the military would intentionally deprive the entire Gaza Strip, including all civilians, supplies necessary for survival. Gallant explicitly said that everything would be closed implying that no aid would be permitted to enter.45 He also affirmed that the IDF was fighting against human animals and that the military was acting accordingly.46 In addition of employing a strategy of starvation during conflict, Gallant arguably conflated Palestinian civilians with Hamas in his statement. He made no attempt to distinguish between innocent people and military operatives during the announcement. The comment garnered widespread criticism for dehumanizing the entire Palestinian community in Gaza. Although Gallant may very well have meant to refer only to Hamas, the fact he made that comment without clarification during the announcement of a military strategy affecting all civilians is at minimum problematic.

The total siege of Gaza exacerbated an already frail civilian infrastructure. A January 2023 report by U.N. agencies estimated that 58% of the Gaza Strip required humanitarian assistance and 29% of Gazan household live under extreme or catastrophic conditions.47 The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) stated that 1.3 million people required food assistance and the Palestinian Water Authority noted that 90% of the water in Gaza is undrinkable.48 The OCHA assessment tells of the devastating effects of a food blockade for Gazan civilians who were already experiencing food insecurity prior to the conflict of October 7th. After the blockade, the humanitarian situation in Gaza became critical. Hospitals experienced an extreme shortage of fuel and medicine necessary to perform lifesaving operations.49 Doctors resorted to performing amputations without anesthesia as civilian loss increased. Doctors also used foil to keep premature babies alive as energy shortages cut power to incubators.50 The loss of life became even more overwhelming as hospitals were unable to keep up with dead bodies. In al-Shifa hospital, one-hundred bodies were left to decompose, both inside the hospital and in morgues that stopped functioning due to lack of electricity.51 The hospital eventually disposed of the bodies in a mass grave. Moreover, women were uniquely affected by the total siege raising gender concerns.

According to the U.N., 180 women are giving birth every day without water, painkillers, anesthesia, or medical supplies.52 As a result, women are significantly more vulnerable to succumb to complications after childbirth. Excessive bleeding after birth is dangerous to the life of a woman, and, even if she survives, the experience is physically debilitating. Additionally, because of a lack of supplies, babies are unable to adequately consume formula. There is no drinkable water necessary to mix the powder solution.53 Women have also struggled to receive basic hygiene products for their periods, further exacerbating sanitation and health issues.54 Lack of basic supplies like sanitation pads, toilet paper, or access to functioning toilets expose women to disease.55 According to the United Nations agency UNRWA, an average of 160 people sheltering in UNRWA schools are sharing a single toilet.56 Women have stated that they cope by wearing two pairs of underwear and those who are able wrap their underwear in tissue paper.57 However, due to a lack of water, they are also unable to shower when menstruating.

The combined effects of the blockade have not been sufficiently remedied by the lift which has allowed for aid trucks to enter Gaza. According to U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller, Israel needs to allow more aid into the strip.58 Although humanitarian trucks are now providing supplies, they only supply a fraction of what is necessary. On December 5th, 100 aid trucks provided 69,000 liters of fuel which is significantly less than the daily average of 170 trucks with 110,000 liters of fuel that were permitted to enter during the temporary ceasefire.59 It is unclear why the IDF will not permit more aid to enter Gaza despite the clear need. It is possible that the IDF is concerned by the possibility that Hamas will coopt the fuel that is being transported. This hesitation, however, should be no bar to increase other basic supplies from being provided such as feminine hygiene products, food, water, and medical supplies. These products are lifesaving and do not affect Israel’s military advantage. Another issue that is worthy of exploration by the OTP is whether the IDF is targeting aid trucks. The International Committee of the Red Cross confirmed that their humanitarian convoy came under fire when it was delivering supplies, an attack that is forbidden under international humanitarian law.60 There is no reason why gunfire or bombs need to be dropped near the Rafah border when the military operations are primarily taking place in northern Gaza. The IDF’s refusal to permit adequate supplies from entering Gaza, and the possible targeting of humanitarian trucks, are human rights issues that should be further explored by the OTP.

III. Crimes Against Humanity

As leaders who oversee the IDF, Netanyahu and Gallant have a responsibility to ensure that Israel’s armed forces are complying with international law. Accordingly, they can be held accountable for war crimes committed by the IDF through either individual or command responsibility. It can be argued that Israel’s demand for 1.1 million Palestinians to flee from northern to southern Gaza, or alternatively out of Palestine, constitutes crimes against humanity under Article 7(1)(d). To satisfy the elements of Article 7, it must be proven that deportation or forcible transfer of a population knowingly occurred as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians.61

A. Forcible Transfer of Palestinians

Following the events of October 7th, IDF spokesperson Daniel Hagari urged 1.1 million Palestinian residents of northern Gaza to flee south within 24 hours.62 He warned that the IDF planned to aggressively target the north and that the warning served to prioritize the safety of Palestinians. In his statement Hagari affirmed that the move would be temporary and that the IDF would allow Palestinians to return home once hostilities subsided.63 The call to move Palestinians was effectively part of a widespread and organized plan to pressure part of an entire population to be transferred out of a region. Despite the goodwill sentiment portrayed in the public service announcement, Hagari and IDF commanders knew or should have known that their demand was extremely dangerous for Palestinians.

Twenty-four hours is an unrealistic and hastened timeframe to expect over one million people to collectively leave a densely populated area with no sense of when they will return. This demand glosses over many important aspects of travel that will impact the feasibility of people being able to successfully leave. For one, the infrastructure of Gaza is not equipped for a mass exodus of people all at once. Roads affected by the conflict make travel with large families difficult. Additionally, not everyone has a means of transport to leave northern Gaza and, as a result, many left by foot. This is dangerous, as travel from northern to southern Gaza by foot takes at least a few hours.

The sick and the elderly are at an increased risk of succumbing to exhaustion during travel or are physically unable to make the move. This is alarming because the IDF provided no exceptions and in fact made the point that anyone who chooses not to evacuate is subject to being identified as a partner in a terrorist organization, as stated in thousands of leaflets that were dropped over northern Gaza.64 The binary option of leaving despite physical constraints which make that impossible, or being subject to brutal attack as a “partner in a terrorist organization” is no option at all. The elderly, ill, and their caretakers who remain in northern Gaza for reasons beyond their control run the risk of being targeted as de facto terrorists, stripping them of their humanity. A U.N. expert describes the bombardment and ejection orders as a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.65

The conflation of civilians and terrorists is apparent from the recent detention of men in Beit Lahia. In early December, dozens of Palestinian men were stripped to their underwear, blindfolded, and made to kneel while detained by Israel soldiers.66 After images were uploaded to social media, people began identifying several of the detainees as their family members unaffiliated with Hamas. At least one of the civilians identified was a journalist. It is important to note the danger of conflating civilians to terrorists simply because they remain in Gaza. Israel has a responsibility to make sure that they avoid knowingly placing civilians in danger.

Subsequent to the initial call for Palestinians to leave the north, Israel set up evacuation windows and safe passageways to help people leave. Unfortunately, Gazans who were fleeing per the orders of the IDF were attacked. A convoy of vehicles carrying civilians, many of whom were children, was hit by a deadly airstrike.67 The IDF places blame on Hamas, and Hamas places blame on the IDF for the attack. An independent investigation by the OTP to verify the truth would help bring clarity as to who committed the attack. Even if the attack was executed by Hamas, the IDF could have taken additional measures to protect civilians as they embarked on the dangerous journey they urged them to take.

Human rights concerns continue to grow from the international community as the south of Gaza, a place Palestinians were told to flee to for safety, is also being bombed. As of December 4th, Israeli warplanes heavily bombarded the area around Khan Younis in the south.68 Bombing southern Gaza after it accumulated almost two million people guarantees high civilian casualties. Gaza has become unlivable and those who are displaced have nowhere to go. There is pressure for Egypt to take Palestinian refugees, but this raises potential ethnic cleansing concerns. Similar to the binary of either leaving the north or risk becoming identified as a terrorist target, Palestinians in the south are being pressured to leave their home State or risk death.

The way the situation is unfolding, the IDF’s military operations are making it impossible for Palestinians to be safe anywhere within the boundaries of the State. Netanyahu has also expressed his intent to take indefinite military control of Gaza, eliminating the possibility of an autonomous Palestinian state even after the eradication of Hamas. He made no mention of allowing displaced Gazans to return and it is unclear if he is planning to effectively annex Gaza. As a result, the temporary evacuation order could become permanent as Palestinians are pushed to seek self-preservation by never returning to Gaza. It is imperative that Israel follow international law as it advances on its military objectives, a requirement that is arguably not being met at this time.

Conclusion

The horrific attacks of October 7th against civilians in Israel need to be met with proportionate force acceptable under international law. The ICC is responsible for investigating the most serious crimes affecting the international community and the Israel–Hamas war has garnered international attention of countries around the world, 153 of which have called for a ceasefire. The disproportionate killing of civilians, the humanitarian blockade, and arguable acts of ethnic cleansing amount to war crimes that should be investigated by the OTP. As of today, there are at least 10,000 and upwards of 18,000 civilians killed during the conflict. The heavy bombing of the Gaza Strip has killed women, children, and journalists. It has decimated important civilian infrastructure and buildings including Gaza’s oldest mosque: the Omari Mosque. Civilians are still recovering from being deprived basic necessities during the complete blockade and thousands of displaced civilians worry that southern Gaza is also becoming a battleground. The ICC has the responsibility to step in and confront illegitimate actions by the IDF under the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli’s Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

Endnotes — (click the footnote reference number, or ↩ symbol, to return to location in text).

1. 1.

   International Criminal Court, Understanding the International Criminal Court (Mar. 12, 2021), available online, archived. ↩

2. 2.

   UN General Assembly Votes by Large Majority for Immediate Humanitarian Ceasefire During Emergency Session, UN News, Dec. 12, 2023, available online. ↩

3. 3.

   Bill Hutchinson, Israel–Hamas War: Timeline and Key Developments, ABC News, Nov. 22, 2023, available online. ↩

4. 4.

   Gaza’s Health System is “Collapsing” and Battles Intensify in the South, NBC News, Dec. 11, 2023, [hereinafter Health System is Collapsing], available online. ↩

5. 5.

   Julian Borger, Civilians Make Up 61% of Gaza Deaths from Airstrikes, Israeli Study Finds, The Guardian, Dec. 9, 2023, available online. ↩

6. 6.

   Health System is Collapsing, supra note 4. ↩

7. 7.

   Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Jul. 17, 1998, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.183/9 [hereinafter Rome Statute], Arts. 8, 7, available online. ↩

8. 8.

   Hutchinson, supra note 3. ↩

9. 9.

   Rome Statute, supra note 7, at Art. 25. ↩

10. 10.

    Id. ↩

11. 11.

    Netanyahu Says Israel is Preparing Ground Invasion of Gaza, Reuters, Oct. 25, 2023, [hereinafter Netanyahu Preparing Ground Invasion], available online. ↩

12. 12.

    Rome Statute, supra note 7, at Art. 30. ↩

13. 13.

    Netanyahu Preparing Ground Invasion, supra note 11. ↩

14. 14.

    Alexandra Sharp, Netanyahu: Israel to Take Indefinite “Security Responsibility” of Gaza, Foreign Pol. (Nov. 7, 2023), available online. ↩

15. 15.

    About Us, Ministry of Defense (Israel), available online (last visited Dec. 12, 2023). ↩

16. 16.

    Hadas Gold, Eyad Kourdi, Jonny Hallam, Ibrahim Dahman, Helen Regan & Tara John, Israeli Defense Minister Orders “Complete Siege” of Gaza, as Hamas Threatens Hostages, CNN, Oct. 9, 2023, available online. ↩

17. 17.

    Rome Statute, supra note 7, at Art. 8. ↩

18. 18.

    Dan De Luce, Peter Nicholas, Abigail Williams & Yasmine Salam, Israel Says it Wants to Destroy Hamas. But Who Would Govern Gaza After That?, NBC News, Oct. 18, 2023, available online. ↩

19. 19.

    Bethan McKernan & Quique Kierszenbaum, “We’re Focused on Maximum Damage”: Ground Offensive into Gaza Seems Imminent, The Guardian, Oct. 10, 2023, available online. ↩

20. 20.

    Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, Israel Hits Gaza Strip with the Equivalent of Two Nuclear Bombs (Nov. 2, 2023), available online. ↩

21. 21.

    Id. ↩

22. 22.

    Mithil Aggarwal, Death and Trauma Stalk Palestinian Children, NBC News, Oct. 26, 2023, available online. ↩

23. 23.

    Linah Mohammad, Tinbete Ermyas & Ailsa Chang, Half of Gaza’s Population is Under 18. Here’s What That Means for the Conflict, NPR, Oct. 18, 2023, available online. ↩

24. 24.

    Simone McCarthy, December 9, 2023, Israel–Hamas War, CNN, Dec. 10, 2023, available online. ↩

25. 25.

    Rule 71: Weapons That Are by Nature Indiscriminate, Int’l Humanitarian L. Databases, available online (last visited Dec. 13, 2023). ↩

26. 26.

    Borger, supra note 5. ↩

27. 27.

    Pamela Falk, Israel Says These Photos Show How Hamas Places Weapons in and Near UN Facilities in Gaza, Including Schools, CBS News, Nov. 8, 2023, available online. ↩

28. 28.

    Foreign Terrorist Organizations—Hamas, National Counterterrorism Center, (updated Sep. 2022), available online (last visited Feb. 14, 2024). ↩

29. 29.

    Mitchell McCluskey & Richard Allen Greene, Israel Military Says 2 Civilians Killed for Every Hamas Militant is a “Tremendously Positive” Ratio Given Combat Challenges, CNN, Dec. 6, 2023, available online. ↩

30. 30.

    “Humanitarian Disaster Zone”: Gaza Hospital Capacity Decimated—WHO, UN News, Dec. 12, 2023, available online. ↩

31. 31.

    Id. ↩

32. 32.

    McCluskey & Greene, supra note 29. ↩

33. 33.

    The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, ICC-01/04-01/07, Prosecutor’s Opening Statement, 11 (ICC TC II, Nov. 24, 2009), available online. ↩

34. 34.

    Situation in Ukraine, ICC-01/22, ICC, available online (last visited Dec. 12, 2023). ↩

35. 35.

    United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Civilian Casualties in Ukraine from 24 February 2022 to 30 June 2023 (Jul. 7, 2023), available online. ↩

36. 36.

    Journalist Casualties in the Israel–Gaza War, CPJ, available online (last visited Dec. 19, 2023). ↩

37. 37.

    Journalists’ Rights Group Counts 94 Media Workers Killed this Year, Most of Them in Gaza, AP, Dec. 8, 2023, available online. ↩

38. 38.

    Journalist Casualties in the Israel–Gaza War, supra note 36. ↩

39. 39.

    Peter Beaumont, Footage Shows IDF Parading Scores of Palestinian Men Around in Underwear, The Guardian, Dec. 8, 2023, available online. ↩

40. 40.

    Article 79—Measures of Protection for Journalists, Int’l Humanitarian L. Databases, available online (last visited Dec. 25, 2023). ↩

41. 41.

    47 Palestinian Families Erased from Civil Registry in Gaza Under Israel’s Genocidal Aggression, WAFA, Oct. 15, 2023, available online. ↩

42. 42.

    NATO StratCom, Hamas’ Use of Human Shields in Gaza (May 14, 2019), available online. ↩

43. 43.

    How Big is Israel’s Military and How Much Funding Does it Get from the US?, Al Jazeera, Oct. 11, 2023, available online. ↩

44. 44.

    Sanjana Karanth, Israeli Defense Minister Announces Siege On Gaza To Fight “Human Animals”, Huff. Post, Oct. 9, 2023, available online. ↩

45. 45.

    Id. ↩

46. 46.

    Id. ↩

47. 47.

    United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Humanitarian Response Plan 5 (Jan. 2023), available online. ↩

48. 48.

    Tom Perry & Crispian Balmer, Gaza Strip: Devastated by Conflict and Israel’s Economic Blockade, Reuters, Oct. 12, 2023, available online. ↩

49. 49.

    Kathleen Magramo, Jack Guy, Ed Upright, Adrienne Vogt, Eric Levenson & Elise Hammond, Israel–Hamas War, CNN, Nov. 8, 2023, available online. ↩

50. 50.

    Bel Trew & Andy Gregory, Tin Foil Used to Keep Babies Alive with Incubators Losing Power at Gaza Hospital—as Tanks Surround Outside, The Independent, Nov. 13, 2023, available online. ↩

51. 51.

    Id. ↩

52. 52.

    Press Release, S.C., SC/15503, Two Thirds of Gaza War Dead Are Women and Children, Briefers Say, as Security Council Debates Their Plight (Nov. 22, 2023), available online. ↩

53. 53.

    Id. ↩

54. 54.

    Nadda Osman & Lubna Masarwa, Israel–Palestine War: Women in Gaza Struggle to Find Hygiene Products Amid the Siege, Mid. East Eye, Nov. 16, 2023, available online. ↩

55. 55.

    Id. ↩

56. 56.

    Situation in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, Including East Jerusalem, Report #25, UNRWA (Nov. 8, 2023), available online. ↩

57. 57.

    Osman, supra note 54. ↩

58. 58.

    Humeyra Pamuk & Daphne Psaledakis, Israel Not Doing Enough to Allow Fuel, Aid Into Gaza—US, Reuters, Dec. 5, 2023, available online. ↩

59. 59.

    Id. ↩

60. 60.

    Magramo, supra note 49. ↩

61. 61.

    Rome Statute, supra note 7, at Art. 7. ↩

62. 62.

    Pamela Falk, Imtiaz Tyab, Tucker Reals & Faris Tanyos, Israel Warns Northern Gaza Residents to Leave, Tells UN 1.1 Million Residents Should Evacuate Within 24 Hours, CBS News, Oct. 23, 2023, available online. ↩

63. 63.

    Id. ↩

64. 64.

    Nadda Osman, Israel–Palestine War: Israel to Identify Civilians as “Terrorist Partners” if They Stay in Northern Gaza, Mid. East Eye, Oct. 21, 2023, available online. ↩

65. 65.

    Id. ↩

66. 66.

    Beaumont, supra note 39. ↩

67. 67.

    Bethan McKernan & Sufian Taha, Gaza Civilians Afraid to Leave Home After Bombing of “Safe Routes”, The Guardian, Oct. 15, 2023, available online. ↩

68. 68.

    Israel Continues Bombardment, Ground Assault in Southern Gaza, CBS News, Dec. 4, 2023, available online. ↩