Extract
[...] Among the most significant investigations, we can cite : - The investigation mission chaired by Judge Richard Goldstone (2009)33, mandated following the Israeli operation 'Cast Lead'34. Its report had concluded to possible war crimes committed by both parties, while highlighting a disproportion in the use of force. - The investigation commission on the 2014 conflict35, mandated after the 'Protective Edge' operation, which highlighted the use of indiscriminate bombings in Gaza, attacks on civilian infrastructure, attacks on UNRWA schools, as well as the indiscriminate launching of rockets by Palestinian groups - The Permanent Commission of Inquiry into the Occupied Palestinian Territory36, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, with the aim of examining the immediate violations and the deep structural causes of the conflict, such as the prolonged occupation, institutionalized discrimination, and colonization Although they do not have the power to impose sanctions, these commissions perform several essential legal functions as they document facts through interviews, expert opinions, satellite imagery, forensic analysis, and open data. [...]
[...] This tactic: use of human shields, is an abuse17 and is prohibited by the Geneva Convention18, it is considered a war crime. This behavior raises the question of shared responsibility when civilians are killed in Israeli counter-attacks. The use of civilians for military purposes aggravates the responsibility of those who use them. A difficult accountability but not impossible in the asymmetric context a. Criteria for control of non-state groups To engage the responsibility of armed groups, international law requires a demonstration of organization, command, and operational control. [...]
[...] This procedure, still at an exploratory stage, illustrates a growing willingness to have national jurisdictions play the role of guarantor of international criminal justice. In France, a complaint was filed in 2023 targeting a high-ranking Hamas official for the hostage-taking of a Franco-Israeli citizen during the October 7 attacks47. The National Antiterrorism Prosecution Office (PNAT), competent for terrorism and international crimes, has opened an investigation. This case fits into the line of previous cases related to international crimes committed abroad, which French jurisdictions have accepted to pursue, provided that the victim has French nationality or that the perpetrator is present on French territory48. [...]
[...] Regarding the ICJ, in its 2024 advisory opinion, it states that this settlement 'seeks to break the territorial contiguity of a future Palestinian state'10. The continuous nature of this violation implies that the illicit act continues over time, which allows considering that the condition of actuality of the violation is well fulfilled. This qualification opens the door to state responsibility. b. The disproportionate use of force in military operations The Israeli military operations in Gaza, such as those of 2008- and 2023, have led to investigations by the Human Rights Council, the Goldstone Commission and several NGOs. [...]
[...] General Conclusion The Israeli-Palestinian conflict generates significant legal issues related to the implementation of international responsibility. While the law provides for mechanisms to punish serious violations such as war crimes, crimes against humanity or illegal occupations, their application faces obstacles. The complexity of the conflict, the diversity of actors, the difficulties in clearly establishing responsibilities and the lack of cooperation from certain States, make it difficult to resort to international justice. However, tools exist and are progressively being used: the International Criminal Court has opened investigations, UN investigative commissions have documented the crimes, and certain national jurisdictions are now taking up these cases. [...]
