Palestinian Territory – The Guardian's recent report on a draft resolution granting legal immunity to the Board of Peace, its members, staff, contractors, and associated forces for actions in the Gaza Strip is highly concerning. The draft also permits the Board to obtain Palestinian public property "free of charge".
This setup would create a de facto authority in the Gaza Strip that compromises Palestinian residents' rights and safety, operating outside judicial oversight. It would legitimise the illegal use of public assets in an occupied area and place Gaza's administration, its resources, and victims' rights within a system protected from accountability.
The draft proposes providing broad legal protection against arrest, detention, and judicial action to the Board, its staff, the High Representative's office, technocrats, international forces, and contractors working in Gaza. Recent reports also indicate that the draft proposes directing claims involving death, injury, illness, or property damage to an internal mechanism under the Board's authority.
Any clause that grants immunity to the Board of Peace, its members, staff, or related entities, protecting them from accountability for violations or harm done to Palestinians, cannot invalidate victims' rights to justice and reparation
Adopting these arrangements would significantly harm Palestinians' access to justice and deny victims the opportunity to present their claims to an independent, impartial body. A mechanism cannot be deemed effective or fair if the same party responsible for violations also handles and judges victims' complaints. The lack of independent accountability not only denies victims justice but also fosters an oversight-free environment. This setting allows the use of broad powers within the Gaza Strip without proper checks and sustains a systemic culture of impunity.
Any international arrangements within the Gaza Strip should be based on the obligation to safeguard Palestinians, address the harm they've suffered, support their recovery from the severe crimes and violations committed against them, and ensure their entitlement to justice and accountability.
These arrangements should not serve as a way to introduce new actors who gain unchecked power over the population, their resources, and public facilities, thus replicating the patterns of control and impunity that Israel has historically employed and continues to employ in its ongoing genocide against Gaza's population.
Iraq's post-2003 experience clearly demonstrates the risks of granting broad immunity from local courts to transitional authorities, foreign forces, or related contractors. These immunities fostered an environment in which foreign actors and private security firms could operate in an occupied country with minimal oversight and accountability. This setting was marked by civilian casualties, serious violations, and pervasive corruption and waste in contracting and reconstruction efforts. The danger was not only the harm caused but also that victims lacked effective local channels to seek justice against actors wielding force, weapons, money, and contracts, leaving them vulnerable and without redress.
Referring to the Iraqi experience in Gaza highlights the risks of replicating a model that has proven dangerous. When external actors gain substantial control over the population, resources, and public infrastructure, and are inherently exempt from judicial oversight, immunity transforms from a manageable safeguard into a privilege that enables unchecked abuse of power. This shift facilitates incidents of killings, injuries, violations, and corruption, while victims lack effective avenues for redress.
Any clause that grants immunity to the Board of Peace, its members, staff, or related entities, protecting them from accountability for violations or harm done to Palestinians, cannot invalidate victims' rights to justice and reparation. Such immunity cannot be used to block national or international legal processes. No administrative or transitional measures can shield individuals or entities from accountability for serious violations or international crimes.
Allowing the Board of Peace and its affiliated bodies to use and obtain public buildings and facilities in Gaza free of charge, as outlined in the draft, should be seen as an arrangement that directly impacts the protection of Palestinian public property and residents' rights to housing, ownership, return, fair compensation, and reconstruction.
In a heavily damaged enclave, with homes, facilities, and vital services destroyed, decisions about public facility use, civilian infrastructure management, contracting, rubble removal, and service distribution directly affect residents' lives, rights, and collective future. These issues must not be managed through arrangements that give an external party significant powers without transparency, independent oversight, or guarantees for fair compensation and redress.
Any party involved in managing, securing, or rebuilding Gaza must adhere strictly to international humanitarian law and human rights law. They should not be granted special legal status that permits free, unregulated use of public facilities, without a transparent and independent system to oversee, regulate, and hold those responsible accountable.
Establishing an internal mechanism for victims to submit claims, while leaving decisions on immunity to the Board of Peace, does not replace the need for independent judicial accountability. Instead, it weakens victims' right to redress, as providing a closed administrative process within the responsible party or its overseer is insufficient. Victims need access to an independent and impartial body that can uncover the truth, assign responsibility, ensure full reparation, and prevent future violations.
Any system that limits victims' claims to the accused institution and then gives that same institution the authority to determine whether judicial accountability is necessary neither administers nor delivers justice. Instead, it replaces justice with an internal process driven by immunity and transforms victims' rights from a fundamental legal entitlement into an administrative procedure overseen by the very party whose accountability is in question.
Moreover, the issue extends beyond the proposed immunities to the nature of the Board of Peace as an external entity responsible for managing the Gaza Strip and reshaping its security, administrative, and economic systems without considering the Palestinian population's will or their right to self-determination. Any transitional or administrative plans for Gaza should not serve as tools to alter the legal status of the territory, bypass Israel's responsibilities as the occupying power, or shift the responsibilities of those obligations onto parallel authorities that hold effective on-ground power without proper democratic or judicial oversight.
States and international organisations are not only obligated to avoid recognising unlawful situations but also must not support or endorse arrangements that cement these situations or undermine the rights of populations under occupation. Similarly, no transitional arrangement should serve as a framework that negates the Palestinian people's right to self-determination or excludes them from vital decisions regarding land administration, resources, public facilities, political future, and fundamental rights.
The United Nations, concerned states, and international organisations should reject any clauses granting immunity to the Board of Peace or related entities, as such clauses prevent accountability for harm or violations caused by their actions. They should also avoid recognising any arrangements that cede effective authority in the Gaza Strip to an external party unless such arrangements are subject to full independent oversight and legal accountability.
Furthermore, assurances are necessary to prevent any transitional or administrative measures in Gaza from bypassing the rules of occupation or Israel's responsibilities as an occupying power. Such measures should not undermine the Palestinian people's right to self-determination or exclude Palestinians from decisions regarding the management of their land, resources, public facilities, and political future.
Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor calls for the establishment of an independent, transparent body to handle victims' complaints and assess claims for compensation and reparations related to harm caused by the Board or its affiliates. This body should be separate from the Board, ensuring independence, impartiality, transparency, the right of appeal, and that it does not override victims' rights to seek justice through national or international courts.
It is crucial to forbid any utilisation of Palestinian public property without an explicit legal basis, approval from the competent Palestinian authorities, and assurances of transparency, oversight, and fair compensation. This helps prevent the reconstruction or interim administration from becoming a way to seize public assets or shift control over civilian property in Gaza.
States involved in arrangements related to the Board of Peace must avoid offering political, financial, logistical, or security assistance to any entities that grant extensive immunities or hinder victims' right to seek redress. They should also ensure that any international engagement in Gaza is contingent upon explicit assurances that respect for international humanitarian law and international human rights law is upheld, along with accountability for violations.
The Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court must monitor any consequences from the adoption of such immunities. It is essential to ensure these immunities are not used to hinder investigations, arrest warrants, or efforts to hold accountable those responsible for international crimes in the Gaza Strip, including attempts to protect individuals, contractors, or security entities from international jurisdiction.
The United Nations Special Procedures, particularly the Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, on the independence of judges and lawyers, on the right to adequate housing, and on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation, and guarantees of non-recurrence, should intervene urgently to examine the effects of these arrangements on Palestinians' rights to justice, ownership, housing, return, compensation, and self-determination.
The Palestinian people have the inalienable right to decide their future and to control their political, administrative, and economic affairs. This fundamental right is a core part of their self-determination and should not be considered an administrative issue that can be postponed or set aside as a transitional measure.
Until Palestinians can freely and safely exercise this right, no transitional or parallel governance structures should be imposed on their behalf or without their consent. This is especially true when such arrangements grant broad immunities and remove the administration of Gaza, its resources, and the rights of its victims from judicial oversight and independent accountability.
