ANALYSIS OF THE PROTECTION OF HOSPITALS AS CIVILIAN OBJECTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: A CASE STUDY OF THE ISRAEL-HAMAS CONFLICT IN GAZA (2023–2025)

Abstract

This article focuses on the legal protection of hospitals as civilian objects under International Humanitarian Law. A specific aspect of this normative action is the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza (2023–2025). The key point raised in this article is the full defense of hospitals as objects that cannot be attacked, even if they are suspected of being used in military activities. Employing a normative legal research method with statutory and case-based approaches, the study evaluates the application of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, the 1977 Additional Protocol I, and customary international law principles specifically distinction, proportionality, and precaution. Although research proves that International Humanitarian Law (IHL) provides special protection to medical facilities, there must be substantial evidence, warning, and sufficient time to take such action before accusing the party concerned of a hostile act. The results of the study show that attacks near or inside medical institutions in Gaza caused civilian deaths and damage to medical facilities even though the principles of proportionality and precaution were adhered to. In conclusion, the conflict shows a lack of control and relevance of international humanitarian law; therefore, countries should establish more control and responsibility for soldiers to comply with the law, provide precise criteria for prohibiting access to medical facilities, and punish violators to prevent similar incidents from happening again.