In a ground-breaking report released on September 16, the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory concluded that Israel’s actions in Gaza constitute genocide.
Chaired by former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, the Commission spent two years meticulously collecting and verifying evidence, documenting over 60,000 Palestinian deaths — including 18,000 children — and the systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure, healthcare facilities, and Gaza’s largest fertility clinic.
In this exclusive interview with Muneef Khan, Ms. Pillay discusses the Commission’s findings, the legal and moral obligations of the international community, the risks posed by high-profile diplomatic initiatives, and the urgent steps states must take to prevent further atrocities and ensure accountability.
By concluding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, your report has set one of the highest possible legal thresholds. What should the international community take from this finding, and what are its immediate implications?
Thank you for acknowledging the importance of the report. It took us two years of collecting, verifying, and checking evidence before reaching these conclusions. First, the international community need not wait for a report from a UN body like the Commission, nor for a ruling on genocide by an international court, such as the ICJ. Third states have an obligation under international law not only to punish genocide but also to prevent it, a duty triggered at least since January 2024 through the first provisional measures ordered by the ICJ in the South Africa application against Israel. This Commission report is the most authoritative UN body report to date. We applied a stringent standard, similar to that used by the ICJ, regarding the specific intent element of the Genocide Convention. Therefore, the report should be treated by the international community as a strong indicator that they must act now to stop the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip. This is a pre-emptive obligation on every state to prevent and punish genocide. The Commission has also provided concrete recommendations, which should be taken seriously and implemented without delay.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza has just broken. How do you view this plan in relation to your Commission’s findings, and more importantly, are you concerned that such high-profile diplomatic initiatives, often driven by power politics rather than international law, could marginalise or eclipse the work of UN accountability mechanisms like your Commission?
Our recommendations coincide with global public demands for an immediate ceasefire and a solution. I am not recommending a two-state solution, though the UN does, and the participation of Palestine is crucial. The recent recognition of Palestine as a state at a high-level summit is significant. We are wary when political leaders gather in private to devise solutions; such processes should be open to scrutiny by the media, NGOs, and the public. This report, with its documented facts and findings, must be considered in negotiations.
To reiterate, do you feel that high-profile diplomatic initiatives could overshadow your Commission’s findings, for instance because global attention has shifted to this 20-point plan for Gaza?
That is precisely why I emphasise the expectations of the world’s public. They align with our call to investigate and prosecute genocide. There must be not only peace but justice and accountability. Negotiations risk producing a superficial or temporary peace that could collapse if they do not take the report’s findings into account.
The Commission verified over 60,000 Palestinians were killed, including more than 18,000 children and nearly 10,000 women. What do these figures indicate about who was targeted?
More than 50% of those killed in Gaza were women, children, and elderly persons — civilians, not combatants. The Commission analysed methods of warfare and the types of weapons used by Israeli security forces, revealing a consistent pattern intended to cause widespread casualties. The claim that Israel was conducting operations to destroy Hamas, defend itself, or secure hostages is unjustified and unreasonable. The mass killings and resulting serious bodily and mental harm demonstrate a consistent pattern showing the intent to physically destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a group.
Research cited in your report shows Gaza’s life expectancy collapsed by almost 35 years in one year, from 75.5 to 40.5. Why is this demographic collapse a critical indicator of group destruction?
The Commission cited this data to show the direct link between Israeli actions and the steep decline in life expectancy since October 7, 2023. Killings, limited access to healthcare, starvation, and malnutrition have contributed directly to this collapse. Such conditions are shocking and indicate a deliberate creation of circumstances leading to the death of Palestinians, which supports the finding of genocidal intent.
In December 2023, an Israeli strike destroyed Gaza’s largest fertility clinic, wiping out approximately 4,000 embryos and 1,000 sperm samples. How does this act fall under the Genocide Convention’s prohibitions regarding the prevention of births within a group?
The clinic was the only fertility centre in Gaza, known for its stored reproductive materials. Israeli forces launched a tank shell that hit the clinic, causing five liquid nitrogen tanks to explode, destroying all reproductive material stored for future Palestinian births. The law does not require actual prevention of births to qualify as genocide; the act must be intended to prevent births with the intent to destroy a group. Experts confirmed that the destruction of the IVF clinic will have repercussions for generations. The Commission found that Israeli authorities knew the site’s function and intentionally destroyed it, fulfilling the elements of genocide in part.
Since May 2025, at least 1,373 Palestinians have been killed seeking food, including 859 at humanitarian distribution sites and 515 along routes. Why did the Commission consider these killings central to its analysis of genocidal policy?
Genocidal intent can be inferred from the totality of evidence, including patterns of conduct and statements by political leaders. The killings at humanitarian sites were considered part of this totality. Medical professionals provided testimony about children, including a one-and-a-half-year-old girl, shot while in her mother’s arms. The widespread and systematic targeting of civilians, especially children, was found to be part of a strategy to destroy the Palestinian group.
On March 23, 2025, 15 first responders were killed at Tal as-Sultan, and ambulances were bulldosed into mass graves. What did your investigation conclude about this incident and Israel’s methods of warfare?
Videos contradicted Israeli false narratives. The Commission found that first responders were intentionally shot over an extended period, indicating intent to kill and knowledge that the victims were Palestinians. This attack fits a broader pattern of targeting healthcare workers and destroying Gaza’s medical system, which further evidences genocidal intent.
The Commission determined that Israel committed four underlying genocidal acts: killings, serious harm, destruction of living conditions, and preventing births. What was decisive in distinguishing genocide from other international crimes?
Genocidal intent requires proof that acts were committed with the aim of destroying, in whole or in part, a protected group. This can be shown through direct evidence, such as statements by authorities, and circumstantial evidence, including patterns of conduct. Our analysis found multiple indicators: deliberate killing of civilians, systematic attacks on cultural and educational sites, starvation and blockade, destruction of healthcare systems, widespread sexual and gender-based violence, and systematic targeting of children. Together, these constitute a clear intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza.
You highlighted statements by Benjamin Netanyahu, Isaac Herzog, and former Defence Minister Yoav Galant as direct incitement. Why are these legally significant?
These statements provide direct evidence of intent. Mr. Netanyahu, on October 7, 2023, pledged “mighty vengeance” on Gaza, instructing residents to leave while targeting the entire city, implying the civilian population was also a target. Mr. Galant announced a complete siege and dehumanised Palestinians, promising total destruction. Mr. Herzog stated the entire nation was responsible. These statements demonstrate policy and intent, justifying the recommendation to investigate these individuals for genocide.
Your report warns that states supplying arms or political support risk breaching their duty to prevent genocide. What concrete steps should governments take?
States must ensure Israel implements ICJ provisional measures, prevent conduct that may constitute genocidal acts, including arms transfers, and cease the transfer of equipment or items like jet fuel if they could facilitate genocide. States must investigate and punish genocide domestically, ensure corporations or individuals within their jurisdiction are not complicit, impose sanctions, facilitate ICC investigations, and support ICJ proceedings like South Africa versus Israel. India should be proud that they have a judge from India on that court. So, it is a matter of shame if India is found to be complicit with Israel by selling or giving them arms.
You recommend that the ICC pursue genocide charges. Which acts should prosecutors prioritise?
All underlying acts of genocide — killings, serious harm, destruction of life conditions, and prevention of births — should be investigated. The ICC prosecutor must respect the independence of the office while investigating crimes documented by the Commission, which demonstrate a consistent pattern of genocidal intent.
Muneef Khan is an independent journalist.
