Fact check: What is the current status of the investigation into the October 7, 2023 attack?

1. A U.S. law-enforcement push that aims to convert outrage into prosecutions

The U.S. Department of Justice created Joint Task Force October 7 in March 2025 to marshal federal investigative and prosecutorial resources toward identifying and charging those responsible for the October 7 attack and related terrorist networks. That initiative is already producing criminal actions abroad, including a public arrest charging Mahmoud Amin Ya'qub Al-Muhtadi for alleged involvement; the task force’s mandate is explicitly to bring perpetrators to justice and to disrupt affiliated networks and financing streams ^{[1] [2]}. The formation of a dedicated multinational law-enforcement effort signals a U.S. policy choice to treat the incident as an ongoing transnational criminal and counterterrorism priority rather than a closed historical event, and it frames subsequent arrests and indictments as part of a coordinated, long-term accountability effort ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Israeli institutional inquiries and the search for internal accountability

Israeli security agencies conducted internal reviews that identified operational failures by the Shin Bet and other bodies; those findings include that actionable intelligence existed but was not properly acted upon and that certain policies contributed to the conditions enabling the attack. Israel’s own probes have been politically charged, with military leadership agreeing to conclude investigations and deliver findings to political authorities by early 2025, a timeline that produced public tension over promotions and political oversight of the armed forces ^{[3] [5]}. The Israeli investigations focus on systemic intelligence and command failures and have ramifications for military careers, doctrine, and public trust; those domestic accountability processes run alongside international and foreign criminal actions, creating parallel but distinct tracks of scrutiny ^{[3] [5]}.

3. International human-rights investigations that assign responsibility across actors

Independent international inquiries and human-rights organizations issued detailed findings in mid-2024 concluding that Hamas and Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes during the October 7 assault, including summary killings and hostage-taking, while also documenting that Israeli forces in Gaza committed serious violations amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity during the subsequent military campaign ^{[6] [4] [7]}. These reports establish a factual record used by courts, states, and international bodies, and they broaden accountability debates beyond attribution of the initial attack to also include proportionality, civilian protection, and post-attack conduct. The coexistence of criminal allegations against attackers and allegations against responding forces complicates single-track narratives and drives multiple forms of legal and political action ^{[6] [4]}.

4. The public record: arrests, classified reports, and shifting media focus

Public-facing milestones include the October 2025 reporting of arrests tied to the attack and the earlier U.S. task-force launch; meanwhile, classified assessments by third parties — such as a U.S. government report noting potential human-rights law violations by Israeli units — have been reported in the press and influence policy debates without necessarily altering criminal-case timelines ^{[2] [8]}. Media coverage in late 2025 highlights evolving aspects of related conflicts, such as hostage returns and humanitarian operations, which can overshadow but do not replace ongoing investigatory work. The mix of declassified indictments and still-classified findings means that transparency varies widely across investigatory tracks, shaping public perception and diplomatic responses ^{[2] [8] [9]}.

5. What remains unresolved and the implications for justice and policy

Multiple tracks remain active with different standards of proof, timelines, and remedies: criminal prosecutions under Joint Task Force efforts pursue individual liability; Israeli internal probes seek accountability and institutional reform; international human-rights inquiries underpin calls for broader accountability and potential international legal action ^{[1] [5] [4]}. Key unresolved items include the completeness of prosecutions, whether senior political or military leaders will face formal charges, how classified intelligence will be handled in courts, and how competing narratives about causation and responsibility will influence diplomatic outcomes. These open questions ensure that the October 7 case will remain a focal point for legal, political, and human-rights efforts for years to come ^{[1] [3] [6]}.