A new report on the systematic use of sexual violence by Hamas terrorists against Israelis in the Gaza border communities on October 7, 2023 offers new frameworks to approach the legal monstrosity that is proving, and eventually indicting, crimes such as these.
The Dinah Project, which authored the report, is made up of five women, legal and gender experts in their own right, who came together after October 7 to form “the leading resource for recognition and justice for victims of Conflict Related Sexual Violence (CRSV).”
The report concludes that “Hamas used sexual violence as a tactical weapon of war,” a finding that carries potentially far-reaching consequences in the international realm. CRSV has been documented in other conflict zones, like Nigeria and Iraq.
“Once thought of as merely an inevitable part of war, international law now recognizes that CRSV is an intentional, strategic tool employed to dehumanize its direct victims and thus spread fear and degrade the group, collective, or nation. By attacking sexuality, one of the primary sources of life and a symbol of humanity’s existential continuity, CRSV sends a message of death and destruction to all,” reads the report.
The report, titled “A Quest for Justice: October 7 and Beyond,” was authored by the Dinah Project’s founding members: Prof. Ruth Halperin-Kaddari, Col. (res.) Sharon Zagagi-Pinhas, and retired judge Nava Ben-Or.
The Dinah Project was the catalyst for the arrival of a team of UN experts to Israel, led by Under Secretary General and Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict Pramila Patten to investigate these crimes.
The team, led by Halperin-Kaddari, analyzed and verified what they could on conflict-related sexual violence from October 7, including incidents of rape, gang rape, torture and humiliation. Other team members include Eetta Prince-Gibson and Nurit Jacobs-Yinon, the visual editor for the report.
There was widespread and systematic use of sexual violence during the October 7 attacks – across six different locations at least: the site of the Nova music festival, Route 232, the Nahal Oz miiltary base, Kibbutz Re’im, Kibbutz Nir Oz, and Kibbutz Kfar Aza. The attacks were “all aimed at a total dehumanization of Israelis and Israeli society,” reads the report.
The problem is not the knowledge that the attacks occurred, but gathering the evidence. “Most victims were murdered, survivors and released captives may be too traumatized to come forward and testify against their abusers; and forensic evidence required for criminal convictions is difficult to obtain in crime scenes that remain war zones.”
The Dinah Project suggests two essential frameworks: Evidentiary and legal. The evidentiary “organizes and categorizes all available information based on its reliability and source,” including testimonies, accounts from survivors, first responders, and any visual evidence that can be gathered. The legal “offers a tailor-made evidence model” for conflict-related sexual violence.
Traditional evidentiary approaches will not work with CRSV, the report proposes; there are conflict settings that render traditional evidence unstable and unreliable. It suggests expanding the legitimacy of evidential sources – to eyewitness and earwitness accounts and circumstantial evidence.
CRSV also targets communities in a unique way – not just individuals, but their wider circles. As such, the broader context of the attack should serve as evidence in itself.
And, what establishes CRSV is the pattern recognition, the report proposes, that “recurring patterns across multiple incidents… establish systematic nature and intentionality.”
To build a strong body of evidence, the report suggests: recognizing CRSV as a distinct category with its own, specialized evidentiary paradigms; broadening that model from being victim-centered so that the “systematic silencing of victims” could be accounted for; diversifying what is considered admissible evidence; applying joint criminal responsibility to all the perpetrators – as opposed to demanding a direct link in specific acts; taking into account community harm; and, applying a higher-than-normal standard of credibility. Though they are less conventional, all these suggestions account for CRSV’s tragically unique circumstances.
