UN Geneva - Multimedia Newsroom : HRC - Press Conference: Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory 13 March 2025

OHCHR - Press Conference: Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory

50:37

MP4

3 GB

13-03-2025

Press Conferences , Edited News | HRC

HRC - Press Conference: Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory 13 March 2025

ENG FRA

Shotlist Story

STORY: Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory

TRT: 03’37”

SOURCE: UNTV CH

RESTRICTIONS: NONE

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH / NATS

ASPECT RATIO: 16:9

DATELINE: 13 March 2025 GENEVA, SWITZERLAND

Speaker: Chris Sidoti, Member of the Commission

SHOTLIST

Exterior medium shot: Palais des Nations, Flag Alley.
Wide shot of the Press room, podium speakers, journalists at UN Geneva.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “Our report finds that Israel has increasingly employed sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender-based violence against Palestinians as part of a broader effort to undermine their right to self-determination. It also concludes that Israel has carried out genocidal acts through the systematic destruction of sexual and reproductive healthcare facilities.”
Medium shot of podium speakers, TV screen showing Commissioner.
SOUNDBITE (English) - Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “The frequency, prevalence and severity of sexual and gender-based crimes perpetrated across the Occupied Palestinian Territory leads the Commission to conclude that sexual and gender-based violence is increasingly used as a method of war by Israel to destabilize, dominate, oppress and destroy the Palestinian people.”
Wide, photographer, journalists.
SOUNDBITE (English) - Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “The Commission documented a pattern of sexual violence, including cases of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture and other inhumane acts that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
Medium, Press room, TV screens showing Commissioner.
SOUNDBITE (English) - Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “We have not made any finding of genocide; we have identified a number of acts that constitute the categories of genocidal act under the law, we have not yet examined the question of genocidal purpose.”
Wide, Press room, photographer and journalists.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “Several requests for information and access were sent to the Government of Israel, including requests for information on specific cases of sexual and gender-based violence carried out by members of the Israeli security forces. The Commission has not received any information about prosecutions of members of the Israeli security forces or Israeli settlers for sexual and violence committed since October 2023.”
Medium-wide, journalists, photographer.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “We heard evidence - you would have heard it if you were looking at our hearings during the last two days - where men and boys were forced to strip wholly or almost wholly, that is down to underpants and then were kept in that condition, often having to sit on stones on the ground in the cold in winter for up to three days.”
Medium, photographer, TV screen showing Commissioner.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “There is a question about whether those who were firing the tank shell - because our conclusion is that it was destroyed by a tank shell - knew at that time that it was a fertility clinic, but certainly their commanders knew and the commanders would have known that there were tanks operating within that vicinity and firing on buildings and fired on a healthcare facility that was clearly marked.”
Medium-wide, photographer, journalists, TV journalists.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Chris Sidoti, Commissioner: “Victims of human rights violations are entitled to have their experience recorded and known, acknowledged and at the very least, we're doing that. But we don't have the capacity, we're not a court, we want the courts to act, we want states to act, we want the United Nations to act.”
Medium-wide, TV journalists, control booths.
Medium-wide, journalists.

Rights probe alleges Israeli forces’ sexual violence against Palestinians used as a method of war

Senior human rights investigators reporting to the Human Rights Council alleged on Thursday that sexual and gender-based violence by Israeli security forces against Palestinian men, women and children have been increasingly used “as a method of war” following the 7 October 2023 attacks that sparked the Gaza war.

“Israel has increasingly employed sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender-based violence against Palestinians as part of a broader effort to undermine their right to self-determination,” maintained Chris Sidoti from the Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT).

Speaking in Geneva, the human rights lawyer said that “the frequency, prevalence and severity of sexual and gender-based crimes perpetrated across the OPT leads the Commission to conclude that sexual and gender-based violence is increasingly used as a method of war by Israel to destabilize, dominate, oppress and destroy the Palestinian people”.

Established by the Council in May 2021, the Commission has a mandate to investigate and report on alleged violations of international law in the OPT, including East Jerusalem - and in Israel. Previous reports have covered in detail the terror attacks on Israeli villages and towns on 7 and 8 October by Hamas-led Palestinian armed fighters that killed around 1,250 people and left more than 250 taken as hostages back to Gaza.

Publication of the Commission’s report followed two days of public hearings held in Geneva from 11 to 12 March, featuring victims and witnesses of sexual and reproductive violence and medical personnel who assisted them, as well as civil society representatives, academics, lawyers and medical experts.

Mr. Sidoti said that the Commission had made several requests to the Israeli authorities for information on specific, serious cases of sexual and gender-based violence against Palestinian prisoners taken from Gaza. But no information has been provided about prosecutions of members of the Israeli security forces or Israeli settlers for sexual and violence committed since October 2023, he told journalists.

In a statement accompanying the release of the Commission’s report, it asserted that “forced public stripping and nudity, sexual harassment including threats of rape, as well as sexual assault” were “standard operating procedure” of the Israeli Security Forces toward Palestinians.

“Other forms of sexual and gender-based violence, including rape and violence to the genitals, were committed either under explicit orders or with implicit encouragement by Israel’s top civilian and military leadership,” the report maintained.”

“We heard evidence - you would have heard it if you were looking at our hearings during the last two days - where men and boys were forced to strip wholly or almost wholly, that is down to underpants and then were kept in that condition, often having to sit on stones on the ground in the cold in winter for up to three days.”

The Commission also asserted that Israeli forces had systematically destroyed sexual and reproductive healthcare facilities across Gaza, including Gaza's largest fertility clinic, Al Basma centre, in December 2023.

Tank shelling destroyed about 4,000 embryos at the clinic that reportedly assisted 2,000-3,000 patients a month.

“There is a question about whether those who were firing the tank shell - because our conclusion is that it was destroyed by a tank shell - knew at that time that it was a fertility clinic,” Mr. Sidoti said. “But certainly their commanders knew and the commanders would have known that there were tanks operating within that vicinity and firing on buildings and fired on a healthcare facility that was clearly marked.”

The Commission’s report finds that the destruction amounts “to two categories of genocidal acts in the Rome Statute and the Genocide Convention, including deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians and imposing measures intended to prevent births”.

Head of the Commission, Navi Pillay, said in a statement that the targeting of reproductive healthcare facilities including “direct attacks” on maternity wards and the IVF clinic, “combined with the use of starvation as a method of war, has impacted all aspects of reproduction…These violations have not only caused severe immediate physical and mental harm and suffering to women and girls, but irreversible long-term effects on the mental health and reproductive and fertility prospects of Palestinians as a group.”

Israel ‘categorically rejects’ allegations

In a press release published on Wednesday, the Israeli mission in Geneva said their Government “categorically rejects the unfounded allegations” made in the commission’s report.

Israel accused the COI of instrumentalising sexual violence “to advance its predetermined and biased political agenda, setting back the important work of international institutions to combat the perpetration of these abhorrent acts as a weapon of war.”

Teleprompter

[Other language spoken]

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you very much for joining us here at this press conference.

So with the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including E Jerusalem and Israel, we're delighted to have with us here today Commissioner Chris Sidoti.

We regret that the Chair of the Commission, Miss Navi Pilay, was unable to join us here today.

As you may know, the Commission has held two days of public hearings here in Geneva to deliver or to gather testimony from witnesses and victims of sexual, reproductive and gender based violence.

And today the Commission has issued its latest report on the subject, Mr Sidoti.

Sidoti will start us off with a brief opening statement and then we'll open the floor to your questions.

Go ahead, Commissioner.

Thanks, Todd, and thank you all very much for joining us this morning.

I wish first to convey the apologies of Navi Pillai, our Chair.

Navi had intended travelling to Geneva this week to participate in our programme for the week, but has found herself unable to travel from South Africa at this stage and so she's asked me to proceed in her absence, which we have been doing all week.

The Secretariat and I this morning we published a report titled More than a Human Can Bear dealing with Israel's systematic use of sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender based violence since 7 October 2023.

Our report finds that Israel has increasingly employed sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender based violence against Palestinians as part of a broader effort to undermine their right to self determination.

It also concludes that Israel has carried out genocidal acts through the systematic destruction of sexual and reproductive healthcare facilities.

The report documents a broad range of violations perpetrated against Palestinian women, men, girls and boys across the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 7 October 2023 that constitutes a major element in the ill treatment of Palestinians and are part of the unlawful occupation and persecution of Palestinians as a group.

The report released today summarises the findings of our investigations since October 2023 into these issues.

It is the first in depth UN investigation into sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender based violence by the Israeli security forces and Israeli settlers since October 2023.

The methodology used in preparation of the report is set out in paragraph six of the document released today.

It's the standard methodology for UN investigations of this kind.

Our report is based on interviews with victims and witnesses, including expert medical witnesses, some of whom appeared during the public hearings which we have conducted over the last two days.

The report lists a number of conclusions.

I draw your attention to one that perhaps best summarises the bottom line at the end of our investigations.

That's contained in paragraph 223.

The frequency, prevalence and severity of sexual and gender based crimes perpetrated across the Occupied Palestinian Territory leads the Commission to conclude that sexual and gender based violence is increasingly used as a method of war by Israel to destabilise, dominate, oppress and destroy the Palestinian people.

The Commission documented a pattern of sexual violence, including cases of **** and other forms of sexual violence, torture and other inhumane acts that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Israel continues to destruct the Commission.

Obstruct.

Sorry, let me go to that again.

Israel continues to obstruct the Commission's investigations and prevent its access not only to Israel itself, but also to the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

As mentioned in the report, several requests for information and access were sent to the Government of Israel, including requests for information on specific cases of sexual and gender based violence carried out by members of the Israeli security forces.

The Commission has not received any information about prosecutions of members of the Israeli security forces or Israeli settlers for sexual and violence committed since October 2023.

The report is published on our website today.

It is being translated into Arabic and Hebrew and those translations will be published on the website as soon as they are available.

We are also having some infographics prepared that try to present in visual form much of the data, particularly the statistics in the report itself.

We hope that they will be on our website by the end of the week.

I welcome any questions about our report and look forward very much to responding to some issues that you may wish to raise during the course of our discussion today.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you, Commissioner.

Now we'll open the floor to questions.

So we'll take one first in the front row on the right.

If you could please just identify yourself in the media outlet that you work for.

Yeah, Swiss news agency.

Thanks for the press conference.

[Other language spoken]

You mention two categories of genocidial acts that have been met.

When the special rapporteur Albanese talks about that, she clearly talks about genocide.

So I'd like you to drive us through that characterisation that you that you made the categories of genocidal acts.

So what does that mean?

Does that mean that you consider that these acts amounts to genocide or partly to genocide or how to explain that characterisation?

And then the Israeli mission here in Geneva rejected the report and said that the there's a double standard in the methodology because this report is leaning, is not leaning on corroborated facts in the contrary with the reports that are dealing with the violences against the other side.

So, yeah, your reaction on that.

[Other language spoken]

It had gone off.

I'm, I'm afraid I have to talk like a lawyer when I answer a legal question about the law of genocide.

But your question is a legal question and therefore it requires a legal response.

The definition of genocide is the same in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and in the much older Genocide Convention.

And it's a a complex definition.

Like all crimes, it has two elements, action and intention.

We at this stage are only looking at action and therefore our report deals with two categories of genocidal act.

The definition contains in fact 5 categories of genocidal act and when we gather evidence and prepare our reports, we look to the various categories of crime under international law to see whether the acts that we have investigated meet the standards, meet the definitions contained in the law.

The second side of genocide is intention, and the genocide definition is especially complex because it has two different elements of intention.

1 is a general intent, the intent to do the acts, but the second is a special intent, the the intent to do the acts for the purpose of destroying A protected group in whole or in part.

So when we refer to two categories of genocidal act, we are referring only to one part of the legal definition.

We have not yet looked comprehensively at the definition as a whole and specifically we have not yet looked at the question of genocidal intent.

At some stage we'll do that.

We're collecting evidence.

We are producing our reports.

You will have seen them going back now from our establishment.

Our first reports were in 2022, but in particular our reports in 2024 and now 2025 are looking at the events since October 7, 2023.

And we will have to look at the question of genocidal intent, but we have not yet done so.

So that that's that's the the legal explanation of where we have reached, but also where we are going.

Your second question dealt with the response from the Australian mission here in Geneva.

I, I was quite surprised to see that response.

Netanyahu has said that Israel will not participate in the council or any any of its processes.

So I'm, I'm worried that the Israeli mission here may be disciplined for breaching that order of the Prime Minister of Israel.

[Other language spoken]

Look, the bottom line is, as usual, it's all lies that they clearly do not read our documents.

They clearly have an agenda that they pursue totally devoid from any relationship to fact.

[Other language spoken]

I I know the very rapid turnover of the staff dealing with media at the Israeli mission here.

I assume that's because they are people with journalistic backgrounds who get fed up with having to lie all the time.

I know that even Hagari now has finally given up.

So I I don't take it very seriously.

[Other language spoken]

Let's take a question in the 2nd row from New York Times.

[Other language spoken]

Your findings in relation to destruction of reproductive healthcare and preventing births focuses very particularly on the BASMA IVF clinic.

I just wondered if you could elaborate on why you conclude that this was deliberately targeted.

Sorry, I hadn't, I'm not noticing that it keeps turning off.

I just assuming that it's on all the time.

The BASMA IBFIVF clinic is the OR was the largest fertility clinic or programme in Gaza, the largest by far.

There are smaller fertility services provided in some of the hospitals, but Basma was the best known and the largest by far.

It's, it's location was extremely well known and it's posted on its building itself as a medical clinic and the logo indicates women and children.

So the, the, the first part of, of intention I think is very clear.

It was known to anybody who was standing outside that building that it was a medical facility.

The Israeli authorities have Geo locations for all healthcare and other protected facilities in Gaza by protected I include schools, shelters, locations of internally displaced persons and so forth.

So certainly the Israeli authorities would know what the purpose of that clinic was.

There is a a question about whether those who were firing the tank shell, because our conclusion is that it was destroyed by a tank shell knew at that time that it was a fertility clinic.

But certainly their commanders knew, and the commanders would have known that there were tanks operating within that vicinity and firing on buildings and fired on a healthcare facility that was clearly marked.

So it it's it's not possible to say that the destruction of the building was unintentional or accidental.

There is an issue about whether it was specifically aimed at the fact that it was a fertility clinic.

But given what we know about the circumstances of the attack and the data that is available to the Israeli military authorities and the way in which the war has been conducted, we were able to conclude on reasonable grounds that it was an attentional attack on a healthcare facility that was providing reproductive services.

[Other language spoken]

We'll go to the second row on the left.

[Other language spoken]

My question is about the image of the images that we are seeing almost daily since the beginning of the war in Gaza.

In the past, very the leak of very few images from Abu Khraib, for example, in Iraq was enough to make a scandal.

Today we have seen hundreds, maybe thousands of images and videos from the prisons and prisoners are very badly treated, as you explained in your report, but no changes.

And we feel that as if the word is not treating this as a scandal anymore.

[Other language spoken]

How do you describe this?

[Other language spoken]

I describe it, Nina, as wilful ignorance, even wilful denial on the part of the international system.

I accept that there is a a intense competition for news coverage these days.

It's very difficult to get tragic situations, the coverage that they require in in the international media.

You must all of you know that yourself, how hard it is to get coverage for these things when there is so much else going on.

And that's part of the story.

But it's known we we deal with some length in the report at the the stripping and the physical and psychological ***** of men and boys.

And the report deals very much with sexual violence against women.

But in in this situation, it's also sexual violence against men and boys.

And we heard evidence you, you would have heard it if you were looking at our hearings during the last two days where men and boys were forced to strip wholly or almost wholly, that is down to underpants, and then were kept in that condition, often having to sit on stones on the ground in the cold in winter for up to three days.

Now this is physical *****, but it's also psychological *****.

[Other language spoken]

So we have no doubt at all, on the basis of the evidence that we received, what is going on, but to get these events the international attention and international action that they deserve has proved a task that we find frustrating, but that the Palestinian victims must find increasing their humiliation, increasing the demeaning conduct that they are being exposed to.

There is an urgent need for accountability, not just accountability because perpetrators of past crimes should be punished, that's called justice, but also accountability as a means of prevention.

These things continue to occur because no one is ever held accountable.

They're not held accountable in Israeli military courts.

They are not held accountable in Israeli civil courts.

And when we see the first tentative efforts at international accountability, we see the kind of hysterical illegal reactions from some parts of the international system.

So this will continue unless and until there is accountability and the victims can only feel frustrated at our failure.

It is our failure as an international system.

Thank you, Commissioner Jeremy, go ahead.

[Other language spoken]

Going back to the maternity and the and the clinic, the question is blunt.

Do you consider that giving birth today to a child in in Gaza amounts to giving a a death certificate at the same time amounts to giving a death sentence?

Yeah, death certificate at the same time.

I'm sorry in, in many cases it does, but not all.

But there I, I would certainly say that any child born in Gaza today has a risk of death of, of being, of dying while an infant or as a young child greater than almost any others in the world.

The killing at the moment has not stopped entirely, but it is much less.

But we know that over the last 18 months, 33% of those who have been killed are children.

A third now that's that that statistical line should cause us to sit up in shock and then do something about it.

Children today not only experience or babies not only experience the kind of deprivation that we describe in the report.

You know, the the, the breastfeeding mothers who because of malnutrition, ill health, **** rates of infection, have difficulty providing best breast milk.

The fact that formula is almost impossible to obtain and when it is obtained it must be mixed with water that is generally unsafe and exposes the baby to a very **** risk of infection.

So you have malnutrition, you have cold, you have babies, newborn babies often in need of neonatal care, living in tents and you have up until 4748 days ago, the constant risk of being killed by bombardment.

I the the fact that I, I think the figure was around about 50,040 to 50,000 babies were born in Gaza last year is an extraordinary statement of hope on the part of Gaza.

Parents hope that their children will live and hope that they will have a future.

But anyone who looks at the statistics, we who who know from talking to people what is going on can see that as a as an act of hope in the middle of a battleground of despair.

[Other language spoken]

And if you could identify yourself in the media outlet that you work for.

[Other language spoken]

Firstly, what do you see are going to be the next steps?

Do you see your findings potentially ending up in courts?

Where do you see that going?

And secondly, on the destruction of the IVF clinic.

The report says that the Commission concludes that this was done with the intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza as a group, in whole or in part, and this is the only inference that could reasonably be drawn from the acts in question.

If you could just talk us through how you reach that conclusion.

[Other language spoken]

Next steps certainly involve the courts, in fact that it already involves the courts.

We are working closely with the International Criminal Court.

Our material is used by the International Court of Justice.

We saw in the advisory opinion that the International Court of Justice issued in July last year, our reports being quoted not just frequently but time and time again at length and the Court's legal analysis being based very much upon our fact finding.

So we're very pleased that the courts are taking notice.

I'm sorry, we are very pleased that the courts are taking notice of our reports and we expect that to continue.

We want though the reports to be taken far more seriously.

I'm sorry.

We want our reports to be taken far more seriously by the United Nations system itself and by individual States and regional organisations of states.

The International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion talked about the obligation of all states under international law not to aid and abate or support in any way the continuation of the unlawful acts that the Court identified in that opinion, which is occupation and discrimination.

So there are obligations on individual states, there are obligations on regional associations of states.

They don't have to wait for action by the Security Council.

If they waited for action by the Security Council, they'd be waiting until **** throws over.

The obligation arises now on States and that's what we're looking for.

That is the next steps that should be occurring by courts, by international organisations, by in, by individual states.

We do the investigation and we do the reporting.

For me, for us, that is extremely important.

Victims of human rights violations are entitled to have their experience recorded and known, acknowledged, and at the very least we're doing that.

But we don't have the capacity, We're not a court.

We want the courts to act, we want states to act.

We want the United Nations to act.

Sorry, your second question dealt with the question of intent with the BASMA Centre.

Yes, we came to that conclusion in relation to the the attack on the BASMA Centre.

As I mentioned earlier in response to the first question about genocide, we're starting more and more to put the pieces together and we will be dealing with the issue comprehensively in the near future.

I, I can't give you an exact time, but we're not ignoring this.

Our approach is, is different from from others because we're first and foremost an investigative body.

We try to build the legal analysis from the bottom up and our investigations are now very well advanced and are evident in our reports.

And we'll be soon in a position to deal comprehensively with the question of genocide.

[Other language spoken]

Let's go to a question in the third row, and then we'll come to AP next.

Yes, thank you very much for doing this.

My name is Satoko Adachi from your musician Boom, a Japanese daily newspaper.

In the public hearing that you conducted in the last two days, the Palestinian lawyer who has been working with the political prisoners said that most of the detainees avoided the describe the sexual ******* that they experienced.

So no wonder why it it took many months for the pictures of the sexual violence to to emerge.

But on the other hand, Israeli government and organisation took more aggressive approach.

So for example, they targeted UN woman and this accusing it of denying sexual violence by Hamas against Israeli woman and basically the western media follow it and cover it without looking at what's happening the other side.

So could you give us your thought on the two different complete opposite approach of the the alleged sexual violence between the Palestinian and then also Israeli society took since October 7th?

And secondly, could you give us your some knowledge about how much the Palestinians and Israeli do understand each other's language?

Meaning how much do the Palestinian understand Hebrew and how much the Israeli understand the Arabic?

[Other language spoken]

I'll answer the the second question first because the answer is much shorter.

I I don't know what the statistics are across the Israeli and Palestinian populations generally, but I do know that Israeli military units always have Arabic interpreters with them who can both interpret the language and read the language.

So at a decision making level, that information is available to Israeli military units while they are operating.

I don't know whether the same is the case with with Palestinian armed groups or or other Palestinian groups.

I do know that the majority of Palestinian citizens of Israel who live within the borders of Israel have at least some Hebrew, but not necessarily fluent and not necessarily all of them.

But the Israeli military units have very good access to Arabic interpretation and translation while conducting their operations.

The the the first question you've dealt with the handling of Israeli violations and and Palestinian violations.

I can't speak generally about how these are understood or interpreted by the Israeli community and the Palestinian community.

I'm I can say that so far as we're concerned, we try to approach both circumstances in the same way, with the same methodology and the same determination.

But we find that there is a difference in the information available to us.

We have a lot more information from Palestinian victims and witnesses than we do from Israeli victims and witnesses.

We reported in June last year a 60 page report on the events of October 7.

That was and is still the most comprehensive UN report on what happened in Southern Israel on that day.

And in that report we said that we we found on, we concluded on reasonable grounds that there had been sexual violence during the course of the Palestinian armed groups attacks on the 7th of October.

But the Israeli government has not responded to our inquiries.

It has not provided us with evidence.

It has not enabled us to meet with and discuss with Israeli victims and witnesses.

We have that investigation as an open investigation.

It it's not closed.

And when we get more information, we will deal with it further.

We have already reported on as much as we can.

We have much more information on the sexual and related violence against Palestinians.

Also that's been going over, going on over a much longer period of time.

October 7th was basically two days, 7th and 8th.

We have now had almost 18 months of response.

And so there is much more information both because of the time involved and because of the openness and accessibility of Palestinian victims and witnesses.

Now that's that's for us, that that's how we get the evidence and conduct our work.

But I really don't have any knowledge as to how anybody's work, including your work as journalists, is interpreted by the the two communities.

Thank you, commissioner.

OK, let's go to the front row and then we'll take a question online.

Jamie from Associated Press.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

If I could just sort of bounce back on what you just asked, what you just answered.

Have you had any effort just to follow up And then I have my question, Have you had any efforts from victims, Israeli victims to come to you even you said that the Israeli authorities have not granted you access.

I mean, outside of that, has there been any, you know, sort of ad hoc, let's say, approach to, to, to to your Commission, even outside of what the Israeli authorities?

And then I wanted to just go back to the issue of the genocidal acts term that you use in the, in the, on 4 occasions in, in the report, you, you, you, you, you use that term in specific circumstances, other human.

And this is kind of following up on what others have said, but anyway, I'm going to continue.

The other human rights monitors have said that use the term genocide outright.

And I think many people in the street think of genocide in terms of hundreds of thousands of deaths in contexts like World War 2, Cambodia, Rwanda, etcetera.

Are you concerned that you're sort of less equivocal use of the term might be a sort of downgrade to what others have said, as if those others who use the term genocide maybe have exaggerated the use of it, have overstated it or or used it too hastily?

Thanks, Jamie, First question, we have had some contact from Israeli victims and witnesses, yes, but not a large amount of it.

So it's, it's limited there.

There could be, I mean, I, I would only be speculating if I gave reasons of that.

But you know, my speculation would include the discouragement of the Israeli authorities.

We reached out to medical personnel and the Israeli Ministry of Health put out a direction to say that there was a formal instruction that they were not to relate to have any cooperation with us, but but some have been willing to speak to us, but not many.

On the second one, different UN and other investigators, monitors, non government organisations have different processes and the fact that we've not yet dealt comprehensively with the question of genocide in no way represents a comment on the work done by others.

In fact we have a **** level of respect for the work done by others.

But our approach is different.

We, we start with investigation and compared to to many, because we rely so much on fact finding it, it's slower, it's slower work.

We have to do it.

And, and as much as we respect all you guys, we don't rely on what you're right.

We have to get the evidence ourselves and we have to do our our own analysis.

And that takes time.

But one of the big problems in this discussion is exactly the point you make, Jamie, that the popular conception of genocide is hundreds of thousands of deaths.

Genocide is one of the most complicated areas of International Criminal law, and the popular perception is understandable because the understanding of genocide is founded on the Holocaust, when 6,000,000 Jewish people and large numbers of other groups were slaughtered.

But the definition of genocide doesn't require that to constitute the crime.

The definition comes from Lincoln, a Polish Jewish jurisprudence scholar, and that's it's his definition that is incorporated into the law.

And the definition does not require a single death to constitute genocide.

There are 5 categories of genocidal act and they are independent of each other, not cumulative.

Only one of the five requires deaths.

The first.

This is the third time I've had to address the issue of of genocide in my work as a human rights lawyer.

The first time concerned the removal of indigenous children in Australia from Indigenous communities and their location in so-called homes or white families, European families.

Now, we in that in that investigation came to the conclusion that these policies constituted genocide, but we did not examine a single death of a child.

One of the categories of genocide is the removal of the children of one group and the placement with another group for the purpose of destroying the first group in whole or in part.

That was the relevant definition and it didn't require a single death.

[Other language spoken]

We have to work on the basis of the legal definition.

This is not to downgrade in any way the seriousness of genocide, but genocide is one of three categories of severe international crime founded on atrocities.

War crimes and crimes against humanity are also the most serious crimes under international law, alongside genocide, and we deal with all three.

I'm sorry to be so loyally again, but when you ask me a legal question, I have no choice but to give a legal answer.

The question is also, as you rightly noted, it's also from the public perception, yes, very much, you know, which is not legal necessarily.

Exactly.

And, and you know, I, I and others, you know, constantly try to make this point that we have to apply the legal definitions, even if the public understanding is different.

But through through you and through forums like this, we have a a role to explain that the basis for our investigations and legal analysis.

[Other language spoken]

Jan Helberman, I write for a different German language media based in Geneva.

I would also like to come back on on genocidal X acts and, and, and genocide.

[Other language spoken]

It's a follow up to Jamie's question, just to be perfectly clear.

So you haven't come to the conclusion yet that the Israelis have committed a genocide in the occupied territories, especially in Gaza #1 and and #2 You have to look into the intent of the Israelis, whether they want to commit a genocide.

And thirdly, are you sort of confident that you can establish facts that the Israelis are acting or have acted with intense or how long would it take for you to come up with the with a clarification or evidence on the intent?

[Other language spoken]

Yes, you're correct.

We have not made any finding of genocide.

We have identified a number of acts that constitute the categories of genocidal act under the law.

We have not yet examined the question of genocidal purpose.

You ask, am I confident that we will find evidence for that purpose?

I have no idea and, and equally I don't care.

We conduct our investigations not on the basis that we are looking for evidence.

We conduct our investigations on the basis that we find fact and then we apply the law to the fact and then our conclusions will fall where they may on the basis of legal application to found facts.

And how long will it take?

It will take as long as it needs to take so far as we're concerned, because we conduct our investigations rigorously.

We have to complete the fact finding 1st and then we will be equal, equally rigorous in our legal analysis.

So I am hopeful that we will be able to speak on this issue later in the year.

We're not delaying it, but nor are we setting aside all the rest of our work, including our fact finding to address this issue.

[Other language spoken]

It is on our agenda, but we will find the facts first.

We will apply the law and our conclusions will will be made on that basis.

[Other language spoken]

Let's take another question from AP Sorry, I didn't mean to actually ask another question.

I also wanted to just talk about paragraph 6 where you talk about the corroboration.

It sounds like you're using a little bit of a lower level of collaboration than in other cases of war crimes and sexual gender based violence.

Can you just explain exactly how you came to that sort of process of why that's merited in this particular case?

It's not merited in this particular case specifically or exclusively, but rather it's part of the the standard methodology contained in OHCHR manuals for commissions of inquiry, fact finding missions and so forth, these mechanisms of the Human Rights Council.

So we we've applied the standard methodology that all of these bodies apply.

There is a slightly different methodology for sexually related allegations simply because of the complexity of sexual related allegations.

There still needs to be corroboration.

It's not just a matter of making an assertion and having it accepted, but the corroboration is is less than and can involve more sources.

More types of evidence than in non sexually related allegations, but it's it's standard.

There's a fuller explanation here in our report, the the extended report on the events of seven October 2023, which we gave to the Human Rights Council last June, A much longer explanation of our methodology there.

I mean, thank you for that answer.

But I mean, it's a little bit hard to maybe for a lot of people to quite understand.

I mean, essentially when we're dealing with cases, when one is dealing with cases of sexual or gender based violence that the standard of proof is is somewhat different.

Or can you, can you say it's sort of an and a more sort of easily digestible way?

In other words, are essentially what you're saying is that that in cases of sexual violence, there's not always an easy way to corroborate those kinds of cases because I mean, it could be very individualised or could you just see what I mean that that's exactly right, Jamie.

Most national legal systems now have different approaches to evidence gathering in sexual cases.

Sexual cases are less likely to have witnesses and they involve a higher level of shame for the victims.

And the perpetrators are normally more resistant to admitting the actions that they have undertaken because of those elements of of shame and the broader seriousness of the offence.

So national legal systems have long had a different approach to investigating and proving sexual violence than in relation to other crimes.

So it's it's pretty similar to that.

But corroboration is necessary.

Corroboration can be based upon similar findings, similar practises that have been carried out in a different area.

Increasingly we are able to use digital evidence and for us that has been extremely important, particularly, as I have said before, we get obstructed by the state of Israel when we try to investigate what's going on.

But there is an enormous quantity of digital evidence these days.

We find, shockingly, that many acts of sexual violence are recorded by the perpetrators or their colleagues and posted on the Internet.

So that kind of of graphic photographic or video evidence when verified can be important corroboration of what a a victim is saying.

Thank you, Commissioner, Let's take a question online from the Spanish news agency.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

So I saw in the press release that Miss Pillay said that because this impunity of these crimes in inside Israel, then she recommends that other countries can initiate legal proceedings even without using the universal jurisdiction.

So can you please explain to us what are the legal basis these other countries and other justice systems can use against Israel?

Thank you again, a legal question requiring a legal answer.

Universal jurisdiction, as the name implies, is universal.

Many countries, however, have supplemented universal jurisdiction by incorporating these kinds of offences in their domestic law, and my country is an example of that.

We have provisions in our own Crimes Act that cover war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide and that is the case in many countries.

So action can be taken at the national level and the national law where those crimes are incorporated into national law or under universal jurisdiction using the the international customary law of of war affecting and war and actions affecting war crimes and crimes against humanity.

So 2 possible courses of action or avenues for action at the national level.

We see in relation to Myanmar at the moment that there is a case in the courts of Argentina relating to the crime of genocide and allegations concerning the Rohingya clearance operation in 2017.

We also see actions being taken or prepared in a number of European countries relating to the arms trade.

Now some of these kinds of actions are proceeding under local law and some are claiming to proceed under universal jurisdiction.

I should add that I'm no expert on the specific laws of individual countries.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Any more questions from the room or online?

[Other language spoken]

I've been known to have those before.

The just wanted to be clear, you had these two days of hearings, the testimonies that you heard.

I mean your report came out two days right after.

I mean, presumably those accounts were already pre included and and what was the purpose of doing this these two hearings if if they were already heard in your report?

Jamie, it's only a ****** question if you weren't watching, I explained to the beginning, yes, everybody who appeared in the the hearings over the last two days has been extensively interviewed by our staff in the months leading up to it, or much more extensively than in the in the hearings.

The purpose of the hearings was twofold.

The first was to give those who did appear the opportunity to speak directly to the commissioners and not just to the investigators.

The investigators did all the hard work and have a good relationship now with, with victims like investigators do.

But we wanted to give some of them at least an opportunity to speak directly to us and, and an opportunity for, for, for us as commissioners to hear from them in their own voice what they experienced and not merely to, to read a transcript or to, to talk to, to the staff.

So it's important for us to get that, that actual direct person to person understanding of what people have suffered.

So that's the first.

The second is also to provide that information more broadly to, to give others an opportunity of hearing directly from those who suffered or witnessed violations.

You guys, as you all know, are not allowed to go into Gaza for for a year and a half, the only foreign media allowed to go into Gaza have been embedded with Israeli military units, which ain't exactly investigative journalism.

It it's, it's an opportunity for those people to state what has happened to them more broadly to the public.

We broadcast almost all of it.

It's on the website.

It can be picked up and used now by the public media in any way you want to use it in TV programmes or otherwise.

But we tried through this methodology to get around the media embargo, the media blockade, the media blockade of Gaza, so that the experiences of people could be heard directly.

[Other language spoken]

We'll take another question from New York Times.

Yeah, sorry, following up on on Jamie's question, that's just a point of detail.

This was the first report looking into the specifically the issue of sexual harm.

How much of that was based essentially on witness testimony gathered in recent months and how much was on previous reports?

And I didn't think, I don't think I saw in the report a reference to the number of of witness testament is you Drew specifically for this, this particular report.

So do you, do you have a number of that or are we talking about essentially a document that includes your findings from reports produced over the last couple of years?

Both, Nick it, It certainly builds on what we have done in the past.

So for example, our report on events post 7 October in Gaza that we released in June last year deals in, in lesser detail with the question of stripping and the detention of men and boys in a near or totally naked situation.

We'd already been collecting evidence of that and we have continued to do so.

And there's a lot of digital evidence that that's available in relation to some of those public activities.

But we also had additional interviews.

It's I think the, the, the, the numbers of victims and witnesses who had extensive interviews with our staff around about 25 to 30 specifically for this report.

So that's victims and and witnesses.

They're also medical and legal experts who contributed beyond them.

[Other language spoken]

Any more questions from the room or online?

[Other language spoken]

Well, that brings us to the end of this press conference today.

Thank you all for joining us.

[Other language spoken]