What have UN and human rights investigations concluded about civilian harm and potential violations in Gaza since October 2023?
Executive summary
Independent UN bodies and major human-rights organizations have concluded that civilians in Gaza suffered catastrophic harm from October 7, 2023 onward, and that both Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups committed serious violations of international law; UN commissions have explicitly found war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israeli authorities and war crimes by Palestinian groups [1] [2]. Over time, the UN Commission of Inquiry expanded its legal assessment—by 2025 alleging that Israeli actions met most elements of genocide—while also documenting widespread deprivation, siege tactics and attacks on civilian infrastructure that drove mass displacement and acute humanitarian collapse in Gaza [3] [4] [5].
1. UN commissions’ core findings: crimes, patterns and scale
The Independent International Commission of Inquiry established by the UN Human Rights Council concluded in mid‑2024 that Israeli authorities were responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity during the Gaza operations beginning 7 October 2023, and also found Palestinian armed groups responsible for war crimes in Israel; the commission’s June 2024 summary drew on witness interviews, satellite imagery, forensic medical reports and open‑source verification [1] [6]. Subsequent work by the same commission and the UN human rights office documented systematic patterns—siege and blockade measures, denial of humanitarian access, destruction of hospitals, mass displacement and extreme food and water insecurity—that collectively caused unprecedented civilian suffering and may amount to additional serious crimes under international law [2] [5].
2. Genocide allegation and its evolution
What began as findings of war crimes and crimes against humanity matured into a legal claim by the commission that Israeli conduct in Gaza met most elements of genocide: reports published in 2025 stated the commission concluded Israeli authorities “committed four of the five genocidal acts” under the 1948 Genocide Convention and urged States to act to halt and punish those acts [3] [7]. The commission itself emphasized the gravity of this judgment and noted that final determinations on State responsibility and genocide lie with judicial bodies such as the International Court of Justice, highlighting the commission’s independent, investigative role distinct from courts [4].
3. Specific harms documented: siege, targeting and deprivation
Investigations documented a declared “complete siege” that restricted food, water, fuel and medical supplies and contributed to acute malnutrition, disease and deaths, while reporting numerous strikes on civilian infrastructure including hospitals and displacement‑causing explosive weapons used in densely populated areas [8] [2] [5]. Human Rights Watch and UN reports detailed deliberate deprivation of water and sanitation and surges in waterborne disease, with investigators arguing that some policies and operational decisions showed intent to deprive essentials to civilian populations [9] [2].
4. Evidence base and methodology — strengths and limits
The UN commission’s reports rely on thousands of open‑source items verified by forensic analysis, remote and regional interviews, medical and satellite data, and hundreds of submissions; they also note Israel’s refusal to cooperate fully, including barring contact with some medical professionals, which the commission says limited on‑the‑ground access [1] [8]. The commission and OHCHR stress their findings are evidence‑based yet independent and not determinative of judicial verdicts, explicitly calling for prosecutions and for courts to make final legal determinations [4] [1].
5. Reactions, accountability proposals and contested politics
The commission urged immediate measures—ceasefire, unimpeded humanitarian access, suspension of arms transfers implicated in abuses and legal action against perpetrators—and called on States to fulfill obligaciones under international law to prevent and punish grave crimes [1] [3]. Israeli authorities have rejected genocide allegations and criticized the UN investigations; international reactions have been mixed, with some governments and organisations endorsing calls for accountability while others urge caution pending judicial determinations [7] [10]. Human‑rights groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty have produced parallel reports corroborating severe deprivation and alleging intentionality in some Israeli policies, and have also documented grave abuses by Palestinian groups, underscoring that multiple actors committed international crimes [9] [11] [12].
6. Remaining gaps and legal next steps
UN investigators and OHCHR repeatedly call for independent judicial processes to establish criminal responsibility, noting the Commission’s role is investigatory and that bodies like the ICC and ICJ are required to make final legal findings; they also underscore evidentiary gaps caused by lack of access and non‑cooperation by some authorities, meaning certain allegations require further judicial fact‑finding [4] [1]. The reporting thus presents a comprehensive, if contested, record of large‑scale civilian harm and plausible international crimes that now awaits formal legal adjudication and political responses.