What’s happened: A new report by the Civil Commission provides the most detailed account to date of sexual and gender-based violence committed during the 7 October 2023 attacks and in subsequent hostage captivity.
- The report concludes that such violence was not incidental but systematic, organised, and integral to the assault.
- Based on a two-year independent investigation and a purpose-built war crimes archive, the report documents patterns of abuse across multiple locations and phases, from the initial attacks to prolonged captivity in Gaza, supported by extensive testimonial, visual, and forensic evidence.
- Drawing on over 1,800 hours of footage, more than 10,000 images, and over 430 testimonies, the Commission identifies 13 recurring forms of sexual violence, including rape, sexual torture, mutilation, forced nudity, and abuse carried out in front of family members. It also highlights what it terms “kinocidal sexual violence”, acts designed to destroy family structures through coercion and humiliation within familial settings. Victims span 52 nationalities, underscoring the international dimension of the crimes.
- Dr. Cochav Elkayam-Levy, who headed the commission, told Army Radio this morning: “This was one of the worst, darkest and brutal crimes humanity has ever seen. The report effectively proves that sexual violence was a systematic strategy. It [the report] has been disseminated to hundreds around the world and has been endorsed by senior jurists.”
- A distinctive feature of the findings is the role of digital dissemination. Perpetrators recorded and circulated sexualised violence via social media and direct messaging, including to victims’ families, amplifying psychological harm and extending the impact beyond the immediate acts.
- The report argues that this transforms such acts into continuing crimes, with enduring consequences for victims and their rehabilitation.
- The Commission concludes that the scale, coordination, and repetition of these acts meet the legal thresholds for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal acts. It frames the report as both an evidentiary archive and a legal roadmap, intended to support future prosecutions and counter denial.
- The full report is available here.
- In parallel, on Monday, the Knesset passed, with 93 votes in favour and none opposed a law establishing a special military tribunal to prosecute approximately 300 captured perpetrators of the 7 October attacks.
- The tribunal will be empowered to try defendants on charges including genocide, terrorism, and offences against state sovereignty, with potential capital punishment for the most serious crimes.
Context: The Civil Commission was founded following Hamas’s brutal October 7, 2023 attack, which left over 1,200 dead and more than 250 kidnapped. In response to the widespread murder, torture, rape, and abduction and ensuing denial, this independent non-profit was established to document, research, and raise global awareness of the war crimes and gender-based violence committed by Hamas and its collaborators. Led by human rights and international law expert Dr. Cochav Elkayam-Levy, the 2024 Israel Prize laureate, the Commission works to amplify victims’ voices and confront denial.
- Previous documentation of 7 October atrocities established the occurrence of sexual violence; this report seeks to demonstrate pattern, intent, and systematisation. By identifying recurring “modes of operation,” it strengthens the argument that such acts were not opportunistic but formed part of a broader strategy of terror. This distinction is central in international law, where proving systematic conduct can elevate crimes to the level of crimes against humanity or genocide.
- The introduction of “kinocidal sexual violence” is also notable. While not yet a recognised legal category, it attempts to capture a specific dimension of the violence, targeting familial bonds as a means of collective destruction. If taken up in legal or academic discourse, it could influence how conflict-related sexual violence is conceptualised in future cases.
- The emphasis on digital dissemination reflects an evolution in the character of mass violence. The weaponisation of visibility, through filming, livestreaming, and direct messaging, extends harm temporally and geographically, blurring the line between physical and psychological warfare. This aspect may complicate legal accountability, particularly regarding those who facilitated or amplified dissemination rather than directly perpetrating violence.
- The parallel move by the Knesset to establish a special tribunal suggests an effort to translate documentation into judicial outcomes. The tribunal’s design, dedicated infrastructure, mixed judicial panels, and public proceedings, indicates recognition of the scale and complexity of the caseload. It also reflects a desire to create a historically visible process, potentially analogous in intent (if not structure) to past war crimes tribunals.
- Under the new law, the tribunal will be able to charge the assailants with all relevant crimes, including genocide under the terms of Israel’s 1950 Law for the Prevention of Genocide, harming Israeli sovereignty, causing war, assisting an enemy during a time of war, and terror charges under Israel’s 2016 law for combating terrorism.
- The law was also a rare consensual issue uniting both government and opposition.
- Taken together, the report and the tribunal legislation signal an emerging phase focused on legal codification and historical record-building.
Looking ahead: Families of victims and survivors continue to call for a state commission of enquiry to fully investigate the events of October 7.
- The law calls for the establishment of a dedicated judicial compound and a staff of around 400 soldiers as well as civilian staffers and 15 judges. The judges would come from the Supreme Court or government approved international jurists.
- An individual case would be heard by three judges, while a five-judge panel would hear proceedings involving multiple defendants. Appeals would be heard by all 15 judges.
- Proceedings are expected to be public and broadcast, reflecting an effort to combine judicial process with public documentation and transparency.


