Schlagwort: human rights

As humanitarian and human rights organisations that have worked for years in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, we are appalled by the Israeli Knesset’s decision to approve a bill that makes death penalty effectively mandatory in the West Bank and which will de facto apply exclusively to Palestinians.

On 30 March, the Knesset approved a bill, introduced by the party of Minister of National Security Ben-Gvir, expanding the use of the death penalty in both military and civilian courts. Although Israeli law has long provided for the death penalty for cases of genocide and wartime espionage, Israel has not carried out executions nor imposed death sentences since 1962. This new legislation not only marks a significant regression: it also does so by imposing capital punishment on de facto ethnic or national grounds and by diluting basic legal safeguards.

In the West Bank – excluding East Jerusalem – the law imposes the death penalty as the default sentence for those convicted of intentional killings classified as acts of terrorism under Israeli legislation, allowing life imprisonment – and life imprisonment only – in “special circumstances” that are not specified in law. Military courts may impose capital punishment by a simple majority, even without a prosecutorial request. Sentences cannot be commuted or pardoned and must be carried out within 90 days. Notably, Israeli settlers in the West Bank are explicitly excluded from the scope of this provision.

Within Israel, civilian courts may impose the death penalty or life imprisonment for intentional killings, if they are committed with the aim of “negating the existence of the State of Israel.” 

Therefore, while the law does not explicitly reference ethnicity or nationality, it is effectively designed to target Palestinians exclusively. It also introduces an exceptional execution regime by hanging, characterised by secrecy, and limited access to legal counsel and external oversight.

The European Union has consistently held that capital punishment is cruel, inhuman, and incompatible with human dignity under all circumstances. But even beyond this principled stance, the new Israeli law breaches basic safeguards recognised by the international community to protect the rights of those facing the death penalty. Its discriminatory nature and lack of due process guarantee, violate the right to life and protections enshrined in international humanitarian and human rights law, such as the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Hague Regulations, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention Against Torture.

Diplomatic engagement by the EU and its Member States urging Israel to reverse course has so far proven ineffective. This appalling development occurs amid an ongoing manmade humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, which a UN Commission of Inquiry, multiple Palestinian, Israeli and international organizations, and independent experts have characterised as constituting genocide, and against the backdrop of an accelerating de facto annexation of the West Bank, as acknowledged by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024. The adoption of the death penalty law is thus part of a pattern of discriminatory policies and practices against Palestinians, which in the same Advisory Opinion the International Court of Justice has found to violate Article 3 CERD, which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid.

In furtherance of these policies, Israel has already crossed established EU red lines: the advancement of settlement construction in the E1 area, which breaks the territorial contiguity of the West Bank, with the intent to prevent a future Palestinian state; the ban on UNRWA and attacks on its facilities, including schools and clinics built and run with EU contributions; the expulsion of international NGOs through restrictive registration procedures; forced evictions of Palestinian residents in East Jerusalem; forced displacement of tens of thousands of Palestinians and widespread demolitions of Palestinian homes and infrastructure in the West Bank, including EU-funded projects; persistent impunity for abuses by Israeli security forces and state-backed settler violence; reports of widespread and systemic torture and mistreatment of Palestinian prisoners; restrictions on religious freedoms; attacks on journalists; and denial of access to EU officials.

As also recalled by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kallas in her statement of 31 March, the EU-Israel Association Agreement establishes respect for democratic principles as an essential element of EU-Israel relations. A review conducted by the EU in June 2025 based on Article 2 of the Agreement found Israel in breach of its human rights obligations for serious abuses against Palestinians and violations of the laws of war, both in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

Nine months on, the time for action is long overdue. The European Union must uphold its stated principles and legal obligations by finally suspending, as a minimum immediate measure, the trade component of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and adopting other measures, as proposed by President von der Leyen in September 2025.

Signatories:

1. 11.11.11
2. ACT Alliance EU
3. Act Church of Sweden 
4. ActionAid International
5. Amnesty International
6. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
7. Bystanders No More
8. Caritas Europa
9. Caritas MONA (Middle East and North Africa)
10. Child Rights International Network (CRIN)
11. Children Not Numbers
12. Christian Aid
13. CIDSE – International Family of Catholic Social Justice Organisations
14. CNCD-11.11.11
15. Cooperazione Internazionale Sud-Sud (CISS)
16. DanChurchAid
17. 80:20 Educating and Acting for a Better World
18. EuroMed Rights
19. Finn Church Aid
20. Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P)
21. Human Rights Watch
22. Insecurity Insight
23. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
24. Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH)
25. Norwegian Church Aid
26. Oxfam
27. Pax Christi International
28. Public Commitee Against Torture in Israel
29. Trócaire
30. United Against Inhumanity
31. Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling (WCLAC) 

The post EU/Israel: Adoption of death penalty law by the Israeli Knesset requires urgent EU measures – Joint statement appeared first on Amnesty International.

Iranian authorities are trampling upon children’s rights and committing a grave violation of international humanitarian law amounting to a war crime by recruiting and mobilizing children as young as 12 into a military campaign led by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Amnesty International said today. 

On 26 March 2026, a deputy of the IRGC Mohammad Rasoul Allah Corps of Greater Tehran, Rahim Nadali, announced that a recruitment campaign called the “Homeland-Defending Combatants for Iran” is “open to volunteers” aged 12 and above, encouraging registrations at Basij bases in mosques across Tehran to join “combatants defending the homeland.” Eyewitness accounts and verified audiovisual evidence show child soldiers having been deployed at IRGC checkpoints and patrols, armed with weapons, including AK47pattern rifles.   

“The Iranian authorities are shamelessly encouraging children as young as 12 to join an IRGC run military campaign, putting them in grave danger and violating international law, which prohibits the recruitment and use of children in the military. Recruiting children under 15 into the armed forces constitutes a war crime,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns. 

As US and Israeli strikes hit thousands of IRGC sites, including Basij facilities, across the country, including through drone attacks targeting security patrols and checkpoints, the deployment of child soldiers alongside IRGC personnel or in their facilities puts them at grave risk of death and injury.

Erika Guevara-Rosas, Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns. 

“As US and Israeli strikes hit thousands of IRGC sites, including Basij facilities, across the country, including through drone attacks targeting security patrols and checkpoints, the deployment of child soldiers alongside IRGC personnel or in their facilities puts them at grave risk of death and injury. Iranian authorities must immediately stop their criminal assault on children’s rights and prohibit the recruitment of anyone under 18 by the armed forces.” 

According to official statements, under announced campaign, recruits are being assigned to a range of activities linked to the IRGC’s “operational and security” activities, including patrols, checkpoint duties, logistical support, distribution of equipment and supplies, and assisting with food, medical and relief tasks.  

Amnesty International has analysed 16 photos and videos that have appeared online since 21 March 2026, showing children wielding weapons such as AK-pattern assault rifles  or standing alongside IRGC and other forces at checkpoints, on patrols and during state-organized militarized rallies in Tehran, Mashad and Kermanshah. 

On 29 March, 11-year-old boy, Alireza Jafari, was killed, while accompanying his father, a member of the IRGC’s Basij, at a checkpoint in Tehran, laying bare the devastating consequences of the presence of children at military objectives. Authorities have confirmed that the child was killed “while serving” at a checkpoint following an Israeli drone attack. 

The boy’s mother told Hamshahri newspaper that on the night of the incident, her husband reported a “shortage of personnel” at checkpoints and took their sons, Alireza Jafari and his younger nine-year-old brother, with him. She added that her husband said Alireza “must get prepared for the days ahead” and that currently, children as young as 15 and 16 commonly take part in checkpoint duties. 

A Senior Reporter for BBC Persian Forensic, Ghoncheh Habibiazad, shared with Amnesty International screenshots of text messages received from four eyewitnesses in Tehran, Karaj, and Rasht who reported seeing children deployed at Basijrun checkpoints and armed with weapons, including AK47pattern rifles, in March 2026.  

One of the eyewitnesses from Tehran wrote: 

“[On 25 March], I saw a child at a checkpoint near our house… I think he was about 15. He just had the faint beginnings of a moustache. It seemed like he was struggling to breathe from the effort of lifting the gun. He was pointing the gun toward the cars.” 

Another eyewitness from Karaj wrote: 

“Today [on 27 March], I saw a child at a checkpoint. I think he was about 16. His facial hair hadn’t even grown. He was holding a Kalashnikov rifle.” 

An eyewitness from Rasht wrote on 30 March: 

“I have seen children wielding weapons. They wear masks to cover their faces, but it is obvious they are kids. They have not even grown in height… some appear to be 13 years old at most… I saw [several] children standing in front of mosques [where Basij bases are located], ahead of the actual forces. I keep thinking their brains aren’t developed like adults and they might actually fire randomly. I am both scared of them and feel sad for them.” 

In a video posted online on 30 March 2026, filmed in Mashhad at Shariati Square, two children, visibly identifiable from their height and stature, are seen wearing Basij camouflage uniforms and balaclavas and carrying AK‑pattern assault rifles while positioned on a white car during a state-organized rally. One child is visible standing through a side window, while the other appears positioned through the top window of the vehicle. The footage shows the children elevated above the crowd as the car moves through the square, with people around them cheering and waving flags. 

The recruitment announcement was circulated alongside a poster depicting a man in a uniform belonging to the Basij battalions of the IRGC, a woman in civilian dress, and two children, a boy and a girl. The poster promoted the campaign under the slogan “Basij with people, for people,” and featured a quote from the late Supreme Leader and commander-in-chief of the armed forces Ali Khamenei, stating that “Basijis must remain at the heart of the field for the main virtues of the Revolution to stay alive.” 

In an interview aired by state media, a deputy of the IRGC Mohammad Rasoul Allah Corps of Greater Tehran, Rahim Nadali, spoke of the “high enthusiasm” among teenagers to join “intelligence and operational patrols,” saying:  

“Teenagers and youth have repeatedly come forward saying they want to take part… Given the ages of those making these requests, we have set the minimum age at 12. There are now kids aged 12-13 who want to be present in this space.” 

Abusive legislative framework enabling the enlistment of children 

The latest recruitment of children is enabled by the IRGC Recruitment Regulations Law, which divides the IRGC personnel into two categories: official guards and Basijis. Article 13 defines Basijis as ordinary, active, and special Basijis. Ordinary Basijis are described as individuals “from various segments of society who believe in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the goals of the Islamic Revolution”. After completing general training, they join and are organized within the “20-million-strong army”, a term coined by the first Supreme Leader, Rouhollah Khomeini, shortly after the 1979 Revolution, and during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) became known as a reference to state efforts at mass mobilization of children and youth into military campaigns.  

Article 93 explicitly allows children under 15 to become ordinary Basijis, effectively setting no minimum age. 

Active Basijis are ordinary Basijis who “volunteer to be organized” and can “collaborate with the IRGC in carrying out assigned missions” after completing training. Article 94 allows children aged 15 and above to qualify as active Basijis. 

Special Basijis, also described as “honorary guards”, are those who “possess the qualifications of an [official] guard and, after completing the training stipulated in this law, are organized and commit to being available fulltime to the IRGC when needed.” Article 16 allows children as young as 16 to become special Basijis. 

Although authorities frequently describe Basijis as “popular forces” or “the people’s forces” of the IRGC, in reality these units are not voluntary. Basij members receive financial compensation. Various laws and policies also require the government to provide Basij agents with preferential access to employment opportunities, housing facilities and loans, and admission advantages for higher education institutions, all of which heighten the risk of recruitment of children from impoverished communities, particularly in a context marked by severe economic hardship. 

Iranian authorities must immediately issue explicit instructions to prohibit military forces in Iran, including the Basij structures of the IRGC, from enlisting children under 18 and ensure that  existing Basijis and other members of the armed forces who are under the age of 18 years are immediately released from service.. 

Iran is a party to the the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibits recruitment of children under 15. The Optional Protocol to the Convention, which Iran has signed but not ratified, prohibits the compulsory recruitment by states of children under-18, as well as the use of under 18s in hostilities. Under customary international humanitarian law, which is legally binding on Iran, conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15 into the armed forces or groups, or using them to participate actively in hostilities constitutes a war crime. 

Background  

According to Iranian authorities, Israeli-USA strikes have killed more than 1,900 people, including 249 women and 216 children. In one egregious incident, a USA strike on a school in Minab killed 168 people, including more than 100 children. Amnesty International’s investigation into the attack found that the school was directly hit with precision-guided munitions and that USA forces failed to do everything feasible to verify that the intended target was a military objective.  

Attacks by the Islamic Republic of Iran have killed at least 16 in Israel, four in the West Bank and 23 in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states.  

The Iranian authorities have a record of violating international humanitarian law by recruiting children, particularly during the 1980s when, by their own admission, over 550,000 children were sent as child soldiers to the Iran–Iraq war, and at least 36,000 of them were killed. 

The post Iran: Recruitment of child soldiers as young as 12 amounts to a war crime  appeared first on Amnesty International.

Last year, the European Commission launched a drive to simplify existing EU laws on artificial intelligence (AI) and data protection, arguing that this would “boost competitiveness” and “cut red tape”. In November 2025, it unveiled proposals for sweeping changes to major laws like the AI Act and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). 

At stake are the rules that protect us on and offline. Corporations work hard to give regulation a bad name, but regulations protect our rights from being steamrolled by states and governments. They protect our environment, our rights at work, our rights online, and so much more. 

Backed by powerful corporations, the Commission’s so-called “Digital Omnibus” threatens to weaken EU digital rules that were once seen as global benchmarks for privacy and AI. This plays on a false dichotomy between regulation and innovation, championed by Big Tech, who seek a rules-free environment that prioritizes profit at any cost. True innovation means finding ways to ensure that the benefits of new technologies are shared by society at large, and not serve only the interest of Big Tech oligarchs. 

The proposals presented under the guise of “simplification” amount to an unprecedented rollback of rights online at the EU level that protect us from corporate and state surveillance, discrimination at the hands of AI systems, and much more. 

Who benefits from AI deregulation/simplification and who is likely to suffer the biggest consequences? 

The “simplification” process is a deregulation process that is likely to benefit business interests. For years, Big Tech have been pushing back against attempts to regulate them, framing content governance rules as censorship, and – with the AI boom – pushing for greater access to all our data to feed their surveillance-based business models. The proposed changes to EU laws come at a time when Big Tech companies have been ramping up their lobbying presence in EU institutions in Brussels, with Amazon alone spending €7 million on lobbying in one year.  

Pressure is mounting across different areas of regulation, resulting in the rolling back of environmental protections, the weakening corporate governance and erosion of digital rights. It all amounts to a coordinated effort to weaken corporate accountability.  

Rolling back these protections puts all of us at risk. 

 What changes does the “Digital Omnibus” propose?

So far, the Commission has unveiled the “Digital Package” comprised of the Digital Omnibus and the Digital Omnibus on AI Regulation. They affect many laws, especially the GDPR and AI Act. 

GDPR 

The GDPR is an EU law that protects personal data by governing how organizations collect, use and secure it. However, the Commission’s proposed reforms to GDPR include redefining what constitutes personal data. Civil society has warned that this will weaken  protections under the law and potentially allow Big Tech to harvest more personal data for the training and operation of AI systems. In addition, companies are required to remove such data from AI systems but only if it does not require “disproportionate efforts”, a term that is not clearly defined and open to misuse. These special carveouts for AI, as other civil society groups have pointed out, could undermine the core purposes of the GDPR – to protect people from the harm caused by the mass collection and analysis of their personal information.  

The reforms also restrict people’s ability to get access to their own data. This is a core right that enables people to know what data is held about them and how it is being used. Proposed changes would allow controllers to refuse requests if they believe the request is for “purposes other than the protection of their data.”  

Taken together, these changes would cut holes in the EU’s flagship data protection law, make it easier for companies and states to harvest and manipulate our data, and make it harder for us to know what is being done, let alone prevent it. 

The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act 

The AI Act, which is yet to fully come into force, is one of the most ambitious attempts globally to protect people from the harms of AI systems. But proposed changes in the AI Omnibus threaten to undermine this by weakening and delaying implementation of the rules, especially for high-risk systems which pose the most risk to the health, safety or fundamental rights of EU citizens.  

Even under the current AI Act, transparency provisions are weak. For example, a provider (i.e. a company) is allowed to determine whether its own system should not be considered a high risk and simply publish this assessment on an EU database. Under the proposed changes, even this minimal safeguard would disappear. AI companies would no longer be required to publish the assessment, giving them free rein to decide the levels of risk their systems pose. This lack of transparency will make it harder for their assessments to be challenged.  

These proposed changes would also delay full implementation of the AI Act. This is especially concerning given the AI Act’s “grand fathering” clause, which means high-risk systems rolled out ahead of the deadline would remain free from many obligations designed to mitigate the human rights risks they pose.  

Will other laws be affected? 

More “simplification” proposals are expected in the pipeline, further watering down our rights to accommodate corporate interests, including a plan to amend existing “better regulation guidelines” which will justify avoiding transparent and participatory policy making. 

The planned “digital fitness check” or assessment of existing digital laws’ effect on competitiveness, will include an “evaluation of all the main legal instruments”, including the Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA) a process which may potentially be used to further justify deregulation.  

Why are these regulations so important to human rights? 

AI and human rights 

As new AI systems are deployed across the world, the need for stronger regulation could not be clearer. All too often these systems rely on massive amounts of private and public data which reflects societal injustices and leads to biased outcomes resulting in further discrimination against some of the most vulnerable in society.  

Amnesty International has documented, for example, how legislative changes in Hungary, enabled the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) targeting peaceful assemblies such as the Budapest and Pécs Pride Marches. Elsewhere, the use of AI systems to monitor the movements of refugees and migrants poses grave risks to human rights, including the right to seek asylum. Other forms of AI, such as fraud detection algorithms used as part of the “digital welfare state”, have disproportionately impacted ethnic minorities, low-income individuals, migrants and refugees in several European countries including Denmark, France, Sweden and the Netherlands. 

Data protection and human rights 

GDPR is one of the most important laws protecting people against abuses of their personal data by Big Tech and states. Though enforcement has been lacking, the potential for this law to serve as a bulwark against the voracious appetite of Silicon Valley’s unlawful surveillance-based business model is vitally important. Data protection laws are amongst the most crucial tools to fight against the mass harvesting of our data, discriminatory profiling, repackaging and analyzing of personal data for resale by data brokers, and online advertising companies. Gaps in data protection laws can also facilitate the sharing and selling of data to state authorities who can use it to profile, surveil, deny us our rights, such as social benefits, or even decide whether to arrest or detain us.  

What happens next? 

The Commission’s proposals are not a fait accompli. Negotiations will take place in coming months that will decide the final form these proposals take. Already there are encouraging signs that the European Council, and the European Parliament, are pushing back against some of the most harmful provisions in the AI Omnibus. In a recent vote, the EU parliament maintained the registration requirement for high-risk systems, albeit in a weakened form which means the problems remain, and the battle is far from over. 

Human rights and the digital fitness check 

Alongside the Digital Package, there is also a huge concern around the forthcoming digital fitness check. Its full scope is unknown, and open-ended, but the DSA and DMA have already been mentioned as potential targets for simplification, and these alone are serious cause for concern. 

The DSA has the potential to assert some control over dangerous features of the Big Tech business model, including algorithmic amplification. Amnesty International research links platform algorithms to ethnic cleansing against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, and grave human rights abuses against Tigrayan people in Ethiopia. In both cases Meta failed to moderate and, in some instances, actively amplified harmful, discriminatory content on Facebook. 

Weakening DSA and DMA  would leave communities more exposed to harms from monopolies and the effects of anti-competitive practices of Big Tech. Amnesty International’s research has demonstrated that their largely unchecked power across various digital sectors poses serious risks to the right to privacy, the right to non-discrimination, freedom of opinion and access to information, and allows them to influence states to prevent rights-respecting regulation.  

Though incomplete – digital rights regulations in the EU offer crucial protections against these sorts of harms. Rather than dismantling them, they need to be strengthened and enforced. People in Europe, and people everywhere around the world whose rights are impacted, should stand up against the Commission’s proposals and call out “simplification” for what it really is: a stripping of our rights to serve the interests of Big Tech and AI.  

The post How EU proposals to “simplify” tech laws will roll back our rights in order to feed AI  appeared first on Amnesty International.

Reacting to Angolan authorities’ continued detention of Serrote Oliviera, also known as General Nila, the leader of the National Union for Total Revolution of Angola (UNTRA), Amnesty International’s Regional Director for East and Southern Africa’s regional office Tigere Chagutah said;.

“250 days since General Nila’s shooting and subsequent arrest and detention, Angolan authorities have failed to present credible evidence against him while repeatedly obstructing his lawyers’ access to the case file, raising serious concerns about fair trial guarantees and due process.

“His case illustrates the Angolan authorities’ escalating repression of activists, punishing and silencing dissent with impunity.

250 days since General Nila’s shooting and subsequent arrest and detention, Angolan authorities have failed to present credible evidence against him while repeatedly obstructing his lawyers’ access to the case file, raising serious concerns about fair trial guarantees and due process.

Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for ESARO

“Pending his release, Amnesty International calls on authorities to ensure full respect for General Nila’s fair trial rights, in line with international standards, including promptly providing his lawyers with full access to all documents related to his case and continued detention.”

Background

In recent years, General Nila has been a prominent voice against injustice in Angola, organizing peaceful demonstrations and advocating for the release of arbitrarily detained activists. General Nila has been detained several times during peaceful demonstrations that had been notified to the authorities.

UNTRA was among the groups that organized protests in July 2025, in response to an increase in fuel prices and transportation costs.

General Nila was shot by security forces when he stopped to film/livestream the first day of a strike in Luanda while on his way to visit a relative in hospital. Since his arrest, his case has been characterized by a lack of transparency over the legal basis for his continued detention, undermining confidence in the justice process and raising concerns about his arbitrary detention.

The post Angola: Authorities must release arbitrarily detained activist General Nila appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the civil complaint  filed before France’s War Crimes Unit by French-Lebanese artist and filmmaker Ali Cherri and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) regarding a November 2024 Israeli military attack on a civilian building in central Beirut which killed seven civilians, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Heba Morayef said: 

Amnesty’s research into the attack found no evidence of a military target in the vicinity at the time of the attack and concluded the strike should be investigated as a war crime. 

Heba Morayef, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa

“Amidst a longstanding pattern of serious violations of international humanitarian law by Israeli forces in Lebanon, and as Israel once again steps up its attacks, if War Crimes Unit prosecutors open an investigation into this  complaint, this would offer a rare opportunity to examine Israel’s actions in a European court given the general impunity it usually enjoys. This case could offer some form of accountability and reparation to victims of this deadly attack. The strike on the residential building, killed at least seven civilians, destroyed several people’s homes. Amnesty’s research into the attack found no evidence of a military target in the vicinity at the time of the attack and concluded the strike should be investigated as a war crime. 

“Since October 2023, Amnesty International has documented serious and repeated violations of international humanitarian law by parties to the conflict in Lebanon, including numerous Israeli airstrikes on residential buildings that killed scores of civilians. More than a year later, none of the victims of these attacks have received justice or reparations and with the renewed intensification of hostilities, people in Lebanon are being forced again to witness their family members being killed, their homes destroyed, and their safety threatened. 

“Given Israel’s escalating attacks and longstanding impunity, states should urgently use universal or other extraterritorial jurisdiction to investigate serious violations of international humanitarian law and, where evidence permits, prosecute those responsible for war crimes in national courts.  

The Lebanese government should cooperate with the proceedings and take other measures to seek accountability for Israeli’s serious violations of international humanitarian law in Lebanon, including by accepting the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction, to ensure credible investigations and meaningful redress for victims.” 

Background 

In February 2026, Amnesty International published an investigation into the 26 November 2024 strike on the Cherri building in the Nouweiri neighbourhood of Beirut, carried out just hours before a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah went into effect. This attack killed Ali Cherri’s parents, Nadira Hayek (78) and Mahmoud Naim Cherri (88) and their Iive-in helper Birki Negesa, along with at least four other civilians, all residents of the same building. 

The organization found no effective advance warnings were issued, Israel identified no military target before or after the strike, and no military objectives were present in the vicinity at the time. These findings provide reasonable grounds to conclude that the strike violated international humanitarian law and should be investigated as a war crime. 

Since 2 March 2026, hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah have intensified significantly across Lebanon, marked by sustained Israeli airstrikes, ground invasion and mass evacuation orders.  

According to Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health on 1 April, 1,318 people have been killed since then—including 125 children and 91 women—and 3,935 others wounded with more than 1.2 million people newly displaced. 

The post Lebanon: Civil complaint in France a rare opportunity to hold Israel to account over deadly strike on a civilian building   appeared first on Amnesty International.