In a report released Tuesday (June 23), a United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) commission of inquiry said that Israel has deliberately targeted Palestinian children in Gaza, documenting a pattern of acts to establish genocidal intent.The commission called children “not just part of a population” but whose survival was “central to the existence and continuity of the Palestinian group”. It said: “The sheer number of cases investigated and documented by the commission showing a clear pattern that children were directly targeted by the Israeli security forces constitutes a key element in the Israeli authorities’ genocidal intent to destroy the Palestinian group in Gaza.”Here’s what to know about the commission, what its report said about Israel’s actions, and how genocide is defined under international law.The commissionThe report has been released by the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel. The commission was established in May 2021 through a UNHRC resolution as an independent body to follow up on the conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory. It is mandated to submit annual reports.Also read | Why Netanyahu now wants Israel to be less dependent on US weaponsThe commission is currently chaired by S Muralidhar of India, who retired in 2023 as the Chief Justice of the Odisha High Court. Apart from Muralidhar, the commission has Florence Mumba of Zambia and Chris Sidoti of Australia as members.Israel’s actionsThe commission cited instances to describe what it called “the intentional killing of Palestinian children through airstrikes in populated areas”. As part of the inquiry process, it interviewed medical practitioners who reported a consistent pattern of children with single gunshot wounds inflicted by quadcopters or snipers, and reviewed photos, videos, CT scans and X-rays provided by them.Story continues below this adThe report highlighted that the October 2025 ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas did not stop the violence. There have been increasing killings of Palestinians, including children, near the “yellow line” — this refers to an Israel-declared security buffer zone that cuts north-to-south through the Gaza Strip. The line, originally established as part of the US-mediated October 2025 Gaza peace plan, marks the specific boundary to which the Israeli military withdrew while maintaining control over a significant portion of the Strip. Justice S Muralidhar. The UNHRC commission is currently chaired by Muralidhar, who retired in 2023 as the Chief Justice of the Odisha High Court. Photo: Express archiveThe report also discussed the torture of children during arrests and detention, including “rape, threats of rape, sexual assault, violence to the genitals, forcible stripping and humiliating acts”. It also alleged that Israeli forces intentionally targeted schools and orphanages, forced the closure of paediatric hospitals, and destroyed infrastructure necessary for children’s survival.The commission urged Israel to halt military operations in Gaza, return the bodies of deceased children, and adjudicate incidents involving children in special courts, among other things. Israel, however, dismissed the report, calling it a “libellous sham” and “defamatory”.In September 2025, the commission, then chaired by Navi Pillay of South Africa and comprising Miloon Kothari of India and Chris Sidoti of Australia as members, had reached similar conclusions on genocidal intent.Story continues below this adThe UN Genocide Convention, under Article II, defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:Killing members of the group;Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”Genocide is defined in the same terms in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) under Article 6, as well as in the statutes of other international and hybrid jurisdictions.While a UN commission does not have the power to impose legal penalties, its findings can be used by international courts as documentary evidence. Noah Weisbord, associate professor of law at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, told The Indian Express that the report adds to the growing body of evidence of “genocidal intent” in cases against Israel.For instance, in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the court has said that Palestinians in Gaza have plausible rights under the UN Genocide Convention that require protection. Weisbord said this points to plausible violation, but the evidence required to prove genocide is held to a much higher standard. “Ethnic cleansing, indiscriminate killing, or war crimes alone are not sufficient to establish it,” he said.Story continues below this adAccording to Weisbord, testimony from commission members, along with photographic and documentary evidence and individual witness statements, would play the deciding role.Also in Explained | From Gaza to southern Lebanon, how Israel’s ‘Yellow Line’ is redrawing the Levant’s security mapRaushan Tara Jaswal, assistant professor of law at O P Jindal Global University, said that though the report is “corroborating evidence”, it is hard to establish the mental element of genocidal intent. She told The Indian Express that unlike in the case of the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar where an ethnicity was targeted, Palestinians do not squarely fit into such definitions of identity.Compared with the ICJ case, Weisbord said there was more hope for the one against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the ICC, “as more details emerge about the chain of command behind acts of genocide, identifying specific battalions and government leaders’ involvement”. “Increasing, inculpatory evidence is creating greater legal danger for Israeli leaders like Netanyahu,” he added.Implications for other nationsFor the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, the commission has suggested that they prohibit all two-way military-related trade involving Israel and apply enforcement measures, if necessary. Jaswal said that these enforcement measures could be a resolution condemning Israel, economic sanctions, cutting the country off diplomatically, or a select few countries coming together to take action against Israel.Story continues below this adFor UN member states, the commission has recommended that they cease the transfer of arms that “have involved or could involve the commission of genocide”, arrest any Israeli officials against whom the ICC has issued arrest warrants, among other things.NewsletterFollow our daily newsletter so you never miss anything important. On Wednesday, we answer readers' questions.SubscribeAccording to Weisbord, the 125 states that are ICC members and parties to the Rome Statute — under which the court prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, among others — are now under more of an obligation to arrest Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders facing ICC arrest warrants if they attempt to enter their territory.Both the US and India are UN member states, but are not members either of the ICC or parties to the Rome Statute. So, they are “under no legal obligation to enforce the ICC arrest warrants”, said Jaswal.Still, Indian and American businesses engaged in arms trade with Israel could, in some circumstances, come under ICC jurisdiction, Weisbord said. Prosecutors, however, would have to prove they knowingly supplied weapons for use in international crimes, making such cases difficult to establish.