To learn more about Special Procedures of the UN Human Rights Council and the Question of Palestine, click here to visit the dedicated webpage.

(This post reproduces only the Gaza-related sections of the report)

26 February 2026

Human Rights Council

Sixty first session

23 February每2 April 2026

Agenda item 3

Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,
political, economic, social, and cultural rights,
including the right to development

 

Domicide: Mass destruction of housing and civilian infrastructure in Gaza, Myanmar, Sudan and Ukraine

Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, Balakrishnan Rajagopal*

 

Summary:

This report is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 55/11 as a follow-up to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing during violent conflict (A/77/190). In 2022, the Special Rapporteur raised alarm that the attacking, bombing and shelling of homes and other civilian objects, and the destruction of entire cities and villages, displacing millions into homelessness 每 which he called ＆domicide＊ – have continued and escalated unabated despite the development of modern human rights and humanitarian law. This report documents the key developments in the campaign of destruction in Gaza, as well as locations in Myanmar, Sudan and Ukraine and calls urgently on the international community to end domicide, hold the perpetrators accountable and to take steps to prevent such destruction in any future conflicts. He hopes that this report will contribute, at least in a small way, to stir the conscience of all towards action and serve as a documentation of the deep suffering that the victims of domicide are experiencing.

 

I. Introduction and scope

  1. Systematic housing destruction during armed conflict has remained a key concern of the Special Rapporteur, as such destruction has become an unfortunate and regular feature in conflicts such as those witnessed in Gaza and across the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Lebanon, Myanmar, Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic and Ukraine.[1] Since 7?October?2023, the Special Rapporteur has repeatedly drawn attention to the unprecedented housing destruction in Gaza publicly and during reporting to the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council.
  2. This report illustrates, based on four conflicts – Gaza, Myanmar, Sudan and Ukraine – the continued need to end impunity for heinous mass destruction of civilian housing. The Special Rapporteur has repeatedly argued that severe violations of economic, social and cultural rights must begin to receive more attention by national and international tribunals, which disproportionately focus on violations of civil rights. He has called upon States to consider recognizing ※domicide§ – the systematic destruction of housing during conflict 每 as a distinct crime under international criminal law.
  3. This report gives particular attention to the systematic housing destruction in Gaza as its scale and the displacement and human suffering caused by it, have been unprecedented. On 27 February 2025, before completing this report, the Special Rapporteur had requested to visit Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory between September and mid-December 2025 to examine the situation in situ. He regrets that his visit request has not been responded to by Israel and as a result, he has not been able to access Israel, Gaza or other parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
  4. The report draws on the Special Rapporteur＊s own reports and communications, as well as the reports of other United Nations human rights mechanisms, including independent fact-finding bodies established by the Human Rights Council, and publicly available information. The four selected conflict situations are not intended to suggest that systematic or widespread destruction of housing may only have occurred in these countries or territories. A comprehensive review of housing destruction in all contemporary conflict situations is beyond the scope of this report.

II. Gaza

  1. The substance of this section of the report draws on a comprehensive communication by the Special Rapporteur and other mandate holders to the State of Israel in December 2025,[2] which addresses allegations of the intentional, widespread and systematic destruction of housing and essential civilian infrastructure, as well as the resulting extensive and repeated forced displacement of civilians, carried out as part of Israel＊s military campaign in Gaza since 7 October 2023. These actions have rendered the majority of Gaza＊s population homeless, drastically reduced Palestinian control over Gaza＊s territory, rendered almost the entire territory uninhabitable, and prevented internally displaced persons (IDPs) from returning to their homes.
  2. Indeed, the level and scale of destruction of housing and civilian infrastructure in Gaza is unprecedented even by the terrible standards of modern warfare since the 20th century. The suffering of the Palestinian people in Gaza is almost impossible to describe in words alone, but the Special Rapporteur considers it his duty to submit this report to the international community and global public opinion with a view to advance justice for Palestinians.
  3. The conduct covered in this report includes intentional and indiscriminate attacks on homes and other civilian objects not justified by military necessity; the use of weapons with wide-area effects in densely populated residential areas; reliance on artificial intelligence systems for targeting homes in a manner that is disproportionate and indiscriminate; pillaging, burning, destruction and bulldozing of homes and civilian infrastructure, including in the absence of active hostilities; extensive demolition of structures to create corridors and buffer zones; attacks on designated humanitarian zones; and measures taken to prevent the delivery of shelter, reconstruction, and the return of IDPs. These acts have occurred in the context of prolonged occupation, blockade, attempts at annexation, and the use of force amounting to acts of aggression.
  4. Between October 2023 and October 2025, estimates indicate that at least 92 percent of Gaza＊s housing units were either fully destroyed or damaged; over 90 percent of the population was displaced; and more than 86 percent of Gaza＊s territory was placed under displacement orders or incorporated into Israeli-militarized zones. The alleged acts constitute grave violations of international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law. There is overwhelming evidence that these violations of the right to adequate housing may amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, and may be considered as part of the crime of genocide against the Palestinian population in Gaza. Given the recorded paucity of prosecutions for violations of economic, social and cultural rights such as the right to adequate housing under international law, there is an urgent need to term such acts as ※domicide§, defined as the widespread or systematic destruction of housing and civilian infrastructure essential to the survival of a population, a concept proposed by the Special Rapporteur for codification as a stand-alone international crime.[3]

A. Pre-conflict housing situation in Gaza

  1. Prior to 7 October 2023, Gaza faced a chronic housing crisis resulting from prolonged occupation, blockade, border restrictions, recurrent military assaults, decades of conflict, and the resulting economic stagnation. Approximately 2.3 million people lived within a 365 square kilometre area, making Gaza one of the most densely populated urban territories globally.
  2. Before the escalation, Gaza＊s housing stock comprised approximately 472,660 units, of which 77 percent were apartments in multi-story buildings, 22 percent individual homes, and 1.4 percent informal housing.[4] Severe land scarcity, coupled with restrictions on border crossings and the entry of construction materials such as cement, concrete and iron, severely constrained the ability to meet housing needs including housing reconstruction after previous wars.

B. Conduct of hostilities and destruction of housing

  1. Israeli airstrikes commenced in Gaza on the morning of 7 October 2023 following attacks by Hamas and other armed groups in Israel that resulted in the killing of approximately 1,200 persons and the abduction of 251 individuals. On 8 October 2023, Israel announced the launch of a large-scale military operation named ※Swords of Iron§ Ground operations began on 27 October 2023, progressing from north to south, including operations in Beit Hanoun, Gaza City, Jabalya, Khan Younis and later Rafah. The campaign effectively severed northern Gaza from the south through the creation of a buffer zone stretching from the Israeli border to the Mediterranean Sea. In August 2025, following announcements to seize Gaza City, attacks intensified in Gaza City and northern Gaza. A phased ceasefire brokered by the United States entered into force on 10 October 2025; however, housing destruction has continued, with entire neighbourhoods that continue to be flattened even beyond the ※yellow line§ at the time of submission of this report.[5]
  2. Israeli officials have justified the campaign as aimed at defeating Hamas, demilitarizing Gaza, and securing the release of hostages while terming the deaths and destruction as proportionate and aimed at Hamas or other armed groups. However, statements by Israeli officials suggesting that Israel is targeting combatants and not civilians have been contradicted by internal Israeli military intelligence data indicating that at least 83 percent of Palestinians killed between October 2023 and May 2025 were civilians.[6]
  3. From all available evidence, the military campaign has deliberately targeted clearly identifiable civilian infrastructure, including high-rise residential buildings and apartment blocks[7], often resulting in the killing of entire families. The conduct of hostilities suggests that the disproportionate killing of civilians and systematic destruction of housing and civilian infrastructure were integral to the military strategy, eroding the fundamental distinction between civilian objects and military objectives.

Incitement and collective punishment

  1. Indeed, statements by senior Israeli officials since 7 October 2023 have included language inciting vengeance, collective punishment, destruction of housing, permanent displacement, and territorial annexation.[8] Public statements explicitly referred to turning Gaza into rubble, imposing complete siege, rendering Gaza uninhabitable, and replacing its population while enjoying a ＆real-estate bonanza＊[9] through rebuilding.

Means and methods of warfare

  1. The destruction of residential areas has been attributed to the use of unguided munitions, wide-area effect weapons, tanks, artillery, rockets, armoured bulldozers, experimental weapons such as explosive-laden robots, and artificial intelligence-driven targeting systems. The Israeli Air Force has reportedly deployed large payload bombs, including the US-manufactured Mark 80 series, in densely populated urban areas. Artillery and multiple launch rocket systems shelled neighbourhoods prior to ground incursions, while tanks fired high-explosive shells into residential areas.
  2. Drones operated by Israeli forces have targeted civilians for forcible displacement, broadcast distressing sounds to induce panic, and conducted intrusive surveillance inside homes. Armoured bulldozers, including Caterpillar D9s supplied by the United States of America, were used extensively to flatten neighbourhoods 每 many motivated by revenge on the part of Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) units[10] – as well as to create corridors, and establish buffer zones such as the Netzarim and Morag corridors. Controlled demolitions of housing have been systematically undertaken by IDF units such as 8219 even after the end of active hostilities, without any conceivable military imperatives.[11] In some cases, civilian contractors were allegedly hired to conduct demolitions and reportedly compensated per structure destroyed.[12]

Use of artificial intelligence in targeting

  1. Artificial intelligence systems including Gospel, Lavender and Where＊s Daddy have reportedly been deployed by the Israeli military, resulting in attacks causing disproportionate civilian harm[13]. Lavender reportedly identified over 37,000 potential targets based on data-driven probability scores, with minimal human oversight. Attacks based on Lavender-generated targets were often carried out using unguided bombs, resulting in significant civilian deaths. Authorization to inflict collateral damage reportedly extended to the killing of up to 15 or 20 civilians for any junior operative/combatant, and over 100 civilians for senior commanders. Where＊s Daddy was used to track individuals to their homes, facilitating strikes while families were present.[14] Gospel reportedly identified entire buildings as military targets, and not individual combatants.
  2. Armoured explosive-laden robots reportedly destroyed approximately 300 residential units daily in Gaza City and Jabalya, detonating explosives with a destructive radius of up to 500 metres. IDF Unit 8200 reportedly collected millions of Palestinian phone call recordings and stored them on Microsoft Azure for targeting until Microsoft terminated access in September 2025 after this was exposed in the media. [15]

Scale of destruction

  1. The volume of ordnance deployed in Gaza has been unprecedented. Between 7 and 12 October 2023 alone, approximately 6,000 bombs were dropped, destroying over 12,600 homes.[16] More than 200,000 tonnes of explosives were dropped on Gaza in almost two years 每 the equivalent of the total energy of approximately 13 Hiroshima-type nuclear bombs. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that more than 92 percent of Gaza＊s housing stock has been damaged or destroyed.[17] The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel found that average daily damage to buildings far exceeded the damage during previous hostilities.

Buffer zones and corridors and the resulting attempted annexation of territory

  1. Israel has established and expanded buffer zones and corridors, including Philadelphi, Morag, Netzarim, and Magen-Oz. As of August 2025, approximately 86 percent of Gaza＊s territory was under Israeli-militarized zones, under displacement orders or where they overlap,[18] prohibiting Palestinian access and habitation. The United Nations Satellite Centre (UNOSAT) reported near-total destruction of structures within these areas, including 95 percent destruction in the Netzarim corridor and 99 percent in the expanded Philadelphi corridor.[19] According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), agricultural land destruction has been so extensive that less than 5 percent of cropland area in Gaza was available for cultivation as early as April 2025.[20] Due to these extreme impacts from buffer zones, corridors and total destruction, there has been a further massive displacement of Palestinians from their territory in Gaza, resulting in loss of territory to Israel which has a serious risk of becoming a permanent annexation contrary to international law.

Attacks on humanitarian zones

  1. More than 150 evacuation orders were issued between October 2023 and September 2025, designating supposed humanitarian zones. Civilians who complied with those orders were repeatedly attacked. Numerous documented incidents occurred in Rafah, Khan Younis, Al-Nuseirat, Deir al-Balah and Al-Mawasi. Al-Mawasi, despite remaining a designated humanitarian zone, was subjected to repeated strikes, killing hundreds, while hosting over 425,000 people in severely overcrowded conditions.

Forced displacement and attacks on shelters

  1. By June 2025, approximately 90 percent of Gaza＊s population, more than half of them children, had been displaced, many multiple times.[21] Between October 2023 and April 2025, at least 2,592 attacks were recorded on refugee or makeshift camps. UNRWA installations serving as shelters were repeatedly attacked, resulting in deaths of at least 965 IDPs and 370 UNRWA staff. Restrictions on entry of aid including winterization materials have continued despite the cease fire, made worse by restrictive measures preventing UNRWA from transporting aid into Gaza and the de-licensing of 37 international NGOs who, together, have historically been the main source of delivery of shelter assistance. Entry of shelter materials has largely remained blocked since 2 March 2025 despite a commitment to allow them under the ceasefire agreements of January and October 2025. The lack of shelter has been particularly devastating during the winter of 2025-2026, resulting in eleven children freezing to death.[22]

Destruction of essential civilian infrastructure

  1. Access to healthcare, water, sanitation, education, transport, food production and livelihoods〞core components of the right to adequate housing 每 have been systematically destroyed. The World Health Organization (WHO) recorded 793 attacks on health facilities, damaging or destroying 94 percent of hospitals.[23] Education infrastructure was devastated, with approximately 97 percent of school buildings damaged or destroyed[24] and 95 percent of higher education campuses damaged or destroyed.[25] Over 89 percent of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) assets were damaged even as of early 2025,[26] and 96 percent of households experienced water insecurity.[27] Road destruction has affected approximately 77 percent of Gaza＊s network as of July 2025, according to UNOSAT.[28] Agricultural devastation has contributed to famine conditions affecting over half a million people.[29]

Mental, psychological and cultural harm

  1. The destruction of homes and repeated displacement have caused severe and lasting psychological trauma. Cultural and religious heritage suffered extensive damage, with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) verifying damage to 145 sites,[30] including historic churches, mosques, museums and cultural centres, reportedly without military necessity. The desecration and bulldozing of cemeteries in Gaza by Israeli forces has further amplified the psychological trauma and harm inflicted.[31]

Impacts on vulnerable groups

  1. Women, children, persons with disabilities and older persons have been disproportionately affected by the loss of housing and displacement, including the resulting homelessness. Risks include gender-based violence, malnutrition, orphanhood, disability from injuries and amputations, neglect of older persons, and severe mental health impacts among children, including depression and risks of suicide.

Barriers to relief, return, recovery and reconstruction

  1. Despite ceasefires, repeated displacement, destruction, and restrictions on aid entry have prevented durable return and recovery. The February 2025 Interim Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment by the World Bank[32] estimated USD 53.2 billion in reconstruction needs, with housing accounting for 53 percent. Debris volume exceeds 61 million tonnes, with clearance projected to take decades. Reconstruction timelines range extend to 80 years, depending on material access through the blockade. Economic recovery 每 including a return to 2022 GDP levels for Gaza – is projected to take centuries[33] under current conditions of occupation and blockade and the scale of destruction to physical and human capital.
  2. The ceasefire has been followed by reports that indicate plans supported by external actors led by the United States, to decide the future of Gaza and redevelop the territory in a manner that offers no assurance of respect for human rights including the right to self-determination and the end of occupation. Meanwhile, slow-motion genocide and domicide in Gaza continue through killings, demolitions, restricted access, militarized zones marked by the ※Yellow Line§ that exclude Palestinians from more of their own land and a complete failure to ensure delivery of aid including shelter.

Applicable legal framework

International law in situations of armed conflict

  1. The Human Rights Council has affirmed, including in resolution 9/9, that both international human rights law and international humanitarian law apply in situations of armed conflict and provide complementary and mutually reinforcing protection. Effective measures must be taken to guarantee and monitor the realization of human rights of civilian populations in such contexts, and to ensure effective protection against violations, in accordance with applicable international human rights law and international humanitarian law. Violations of these norms, including grave breaches, may constitute international crimes.

International law governing occupation and annexation

Findings of the International Court of Justice

  1. On 19 July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its Advisory Opinion on the?Legal Consequences Arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. The Court clarified that Gaza constitutes an integral part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and that, notwithstanding Israel＊s disengagement since 2005, Israel remains bound by international law as the occupying Power (para. 94). The ICJ declared Israel＊s presence in the OPT unlawful under both jus ad bellum and jus in bello standards and recognized that Isreal had violated the prohibitions against racial segregation and apartheid.
  2. The Court reaffirmed that occupation cannot transfer or confer sovereign title to an occupying Power over occupied territory, reiterating that occupation is a temporary, de facto situation in which the occupying Power can neither claim possession nor exert sovereignty over the territory. The ICJ explicitly affirmed that Israel＊s security concerns cannot override the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force, which constitutes a peremptory norm of international law.
  3. The ICJ further affirmed that prolonged occupation may become unlawful and may amount to de facto annexation through the use of force, in violation of the jus cogens norm prohibiting the acquisition of territory by force. While occupation per se is not unlawful under international law when it is temporary and governed by strict rules, an occupation maintained through force and prolonged to the point of annexation constitutes an act of aggression.
  4. This interpretation aligns with the definition of aggression contained in General Assembly resolution 3314 (1974), which defines aggression as ※the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territoriality or political independence of another State or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations§ (art. 1(a)). This definition, incorporated verbatim into article 8 bis of the Rome Statute, applies irrespective of questions of recognition or UN membership of the occupied territory. Accordingly, under all plausible legal interpretations, Israel＊s prolonged occupation of Palestine including Gaza〞declared unlawful by the ICJ in 2024〞constitutes an act of aggression.

Legal consequences and obligations of third States

  1. The ICJ mandated Israel to terminate its occupation, dismantle all settlements and the associated settlement regime, provide reparations to Palestinian victims, and facilitate the return of Palestinians displaced since 1967. The Court further observed that all States must refrain from rendering aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel＊s unlawful presence, and must ensure that impediments to the Palestinian people＊s right to self-determination are brought to an end. The ICJ also affirmed that all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention have an obligation to ensure Israel＊s compliance with international humanitarian law (para. 279), and that all States must cooperate with modalities established by the General Assembly and Security Council to bring the occupation to an end (para. 281).
  2. On 18 September 2024, the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/24, establishing those modalities. The resolution demanded that Israel end its unlawful presence in the OPT without delay and no later than 12 months after adoption (para. 2), i.e., by 18 September 2025. It called upon States to take steps toward ceasing the provision or transfer of arms, munitions and related equipment to Israel where there are reasonable grounds to suspect their use in the OPT (para. 5(b)). The resolution further affirmed Israel＊s obligation to make reparations for internationally wrongful acts (para. 9) and called for the establishment of an international mechanism for reparation and an international register of damage (para. 10).
  3. Despite the expiration of the deadline set by the General Assembly, Israel has escalated settlement expansion and conversion of Palestinian land, including Area C, to Israel as ＆state land＊ across the OPT and has not withdrawn its forces from Gaza.

Genocide Convention and ICJ provisional measures

  1. In its order of 26 January 2024 in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel), the ICJ concluded, prima facie, that it has jurisdiction under article 9 of the Genocide Convention and that Israel＊s acts in Gaza since 7 October 2023 could amount to genocide. The Court issued six binding provisional measures under article 41 of its Statute, ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts, prevent and punish incitement to genocide, ensure humanitarian assistance, and preserve evidence.
  2. The ICJ intervened again on 28 March and 24 May 2024, recognizing an ※exceptionally grave§ risk of genocide in Rafah and ordering Israel to immediately cease military operations and unconditionally withdraw from Gaza, ensure unimpeded humanitarian access, and permit fact-finding, monitoring and evidence-preservation activities.
  3. Independently of these provisional measures, the Genocide Convention imposes obligations on all States parties. As clarified by the Court (26 January 2024, para. 33), all States share a common interest in preventing, suppressing and punishing genocide. The prohibition of genocide is a jus cogens norm, and the issuance of provisional measures triggers, at a minimum, a duty to prevent, given the Court＊s findings on the plausibility and urgency of the risk.

State responsibility and reparations

  1. General international law governs annexation, occupation, and State responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, including the duty to make full reparation. The destruction of Gaza and the complicity of other States and businesses implicates violations of obligations prohibiting genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other norms of international law. These principles are grounded in the jurisprudence of the Permanent Court of International Justice, the International Court of Justice, and the International Law Commission＊s Articles on State Responsibility, and are particularly relevant to the future reconstruction of Gaza.
  2. The ceasefire agreement concluded on 10 October 2025 did not address Israel＊s responsibility, or that of other complicit actors, to repair the extensive destruction inflicted on Gaza. However, such responsibility remains central to the reconstruction of Gaza.

International human rights law and the right to adequate housing

Normative content of the right to adequate housing

  1. The right to adequate housing, as clarified by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) in general comment No. 4, extends beyond mere shelter and encompasses security of tenure, availability of services and infrastructure, affordability, habitability, accessibility, appropriate location, and cultural adequacy. It should also include sustainability, as previously noted by the Special Rapporteur.[34]
  2. The large-scale destruction of housing and life-sustaining infrastructure in Gaza, combined with displacement orders rendering most of the territory uninhabitable or inaccessible, and the resulting mass homelessness, constitute egregious violations of all core elements of the right to adequate housing. Housing must also be understood as a cornerstone of individual and collective memory, social belonging and cultural identity. The reduction of entire cities to rubble and the uprooting of their inhabitants gravely endanger these social and cultural bonds and risk the permanent severing of Palestinians from their land, identity and heritage.

Interdependence with other human rights

  1. The destruction of housing has triggered a domino effect on the enjoyment of numerous rights, including the rights to life; security of the person; food; water; sanitation; health; education; work; social security; privacy and family life; and a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. These impacts raise concerns under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Convention against Torture (CAT) and the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), all of which have been ratified by Israel.
  2. Thousands of civilians have reportedly been killed in their homes, with many more missing under the rubble. Additional loss of life has occurred and likely due to homelessness, starvation, lack of safe water and sanitation, unhygienic conditions, unexploded ordnance, and lack of medical care. Hundreds of thousands have been injured, maimed or disabled. The cumulative trauma caused by loss of homes, family members, uncertainty, and repeated displacement constitutes a serious violation of the right to physical and mental health.
  3. The systematic destruction of housing, particularly when combined with deliberate restrictions on food, water, shelter, energy and medicine, may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Evacuation orders, while permissible in limited circumstances, must be lawful, necessary, proportionate and rights-respecting. However, in Gaza, such orders have resulted in repeated, large-scale displacement, family separation, disruption of livelihoods and education, and forced concentration of civilians in shrinking areas lacking basic services, disproportionately affecting vulnerable groups while inflicting disproportionate and widespread destruction and suffering.

Relevant human rights standards

  1. Israel is a party to the ICCPR, ICESCR and CAT. Obligations under these treaties continue to apply during armed conflict and wherever a State exercises jurisdiction.
  2. Relevant provisions include, inter alia:

(a)??? ICCPR articles 1, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 17;

(b)??? ICESCR articles 1, 11, 12, 13 and 15.

(c)??? CAT article 16.

  1. Common article 1 of both Covenants affirms the right to self-determination. General Assembly resolution 45/130 reaffirms the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and condemns violations and expansionist activities obstructing that right.
  2. General comments Nos. 4, 7 and 26 of the CESCR further clarify the scope of the right to adequate housing, the prohibition of forced evictions, and the centrality of land to economic, social and cultural rights. The 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement establish protections against displacement, discrimination, and practices aimed at altering the demographic composition of a population.

International humanitarian law

  1. Housing constitutes civilian property protected under international humanitarian law. Intentionally directing attacks against housing used by civilians constitutes a war crime. The patterns described raise concerns of grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention (art. 147) and violations of Additional Protocol I, including articles 51, 57 and 85.
  2. The use of wide-area effect weapons in densely populated areas, the destruction of housing in areas under effective control, and evacuation orders suggesting permanent displacement may amount to unlawful forcible transfer, collective punishment (Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 33), and violations of article 53 prohibiting destruction of property by an occupying Power.
  3. The reported use of artificial intelligence-based targeting systems, including Lavender, Gospel and Where＊s Daddy, raises serious concerns regarding compliance with the principles of distinction, proportionality, necessity and precaution. The systematic destruction of housing by IDF Unit 8219 using controlled demolitions after the end of hostilities constitutes ＆wanton destruction＊ and is prohibited under the Hague regulations and the Geneva Conventions.
  4. Restrictions on humanitarian aid, including the full blockade since 2 March 2025, further contravene obligations under article 69 of Additional Protocol I to ensure essential supplies, including shelter.

International criminal law

  1. The widespread, systematic and intentional nature of the alleged violations provides reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide have been committed, as defined in the Rome Statute.
  2. Potential crimes against humanity include deportation or forcible transfer (art. 7(1)(d)), persecution (art. 7(1)(h)), apartheid (art. 7(1)(j)) and other inhumane acts (art. 7(1)(k)). Potential war crimes include extensive destruction of property not justified by military necessity (art. 8(2)(a)(iv)), unlawful deportation or transfer (art. 8(2)(a)(vii)), attacks on civilian objects (art. 8(2)(b)(iii)), and indiscriminate attacks (art. 8(2)(b)(iv)每(ix)).
  3. The acts described may also meet the threshold for genocide under articles 6(a)每(c) of the Rome Statute and the Genocide Convention, including killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction. The ICJ has clarified that destruction of homes and denial of living accommodation, when of sufficient scale or duration, may constitute genocidal acts. Reference is further made to the report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel of 16 September 2025, concluding that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.[35]
  4. The allegations described embody the concept of?domicide, defined by the Special Rapporteur as the deliberate, widespread and systematic destruction of housing during conflict (A/77/190; A/80/351). The systematic destruction of housing and infrastructure in Gaza reflects such a pattern and underscores the need to recognize domicide as a standalone international crime.
  5. Finally, the destruction of housing coupled with expanded territorial control over Gaza reinforces concerns regarding the crime of aggression. Prolonged occupation amounting to unlawful annexation constitutes an act of aggression under article 8 bis of the Rome Statute and General Assembly resolution 3314 (1974). Such acts represent a fundamental challenge to the international legal order.

Conclusion and recommendations

  1. The present report demonstrates that domicide, the widespread and systematic destruction of housing and civilian infrastructure in conflicts, is all too common without any real check or accountability, as illustrated in Gaza, Myanmar, Sudan and Ukraine. Such domicide constitutes a grave assault on the right to adequate housing, and on the foundations of human dignity, identity and survival. Across all four conflict contexts, the intentional targeting, demolition or appropriation of homes, has not been incidental to hostilities, but has functioned as a method of warfare, repression and territorial control and often annexation. Attacks on homes are the principal way combatants establish control over land, and thus, territory, with a view to establishing sovereignty. The goals, scale, pattern and effects of this destruction amount to egregious violations of international law, including peremptory norms prohibiting aggression and acquisition of territory by force, core norms of international human rights law and international humanitarian law and, in many instances, give rise to State responsibility for war crimes, crimes against humanity and, where relevant, genocide.
  2. The denial of access to land, the obstruction of return, and the destruction of housing and civilian infrastructure essential to life have rendered entire populations homeless, forcibly displaced and dependent on humanitarian assistance, while eroding prospects for recovery, self-determination and durable peace. These practices exemplify domicide 〞 the deliberate, widespread or systematic destruction of housing 〞 and underscore the urgent need for accountability, prevention and reparations. Ending impunity for violations of economic, social and cultural rights, particularly the right to adequate housing and land, is indispensable to restoring justice and preventing recurrence.
  3. States should:

(a)??? Respect, protect and fulfil the right to adequate housing and land at all times, including during armed conflict and occupation;

(b)??? Cease complicity in domicide, including through active assistance for or failures to prevent mass destruction of housing;

(c)??? Immediately cease attacks on civilian housing and infrastructure and prohibit the use of weapons with wide-area effects, including drones and loitering munitions in populated areas;

(d)??? Cease and prohibit relying on artificial intelligence for targeting during combat operations;

(e)??? Cease and prohibit punitive housing demolitions or other mass clearance of housing after the end of active combat operations;

(f)??? Change and implement rules of engagement for armed forces in all conflicts to avoid domicide and mass destruction of other civilian objects;

(g)??? Ensure accountability for domicide through independent investigations, criminal prosecutions and international cooperation, including through recognition of domicide as a distinct international crime;

(h)??? Refrain from providing arms, assistance or support where there is a clear risk or evidence of their use in housing destruction or forced displacement;

(i)??? Guarantee the right of refugees and internally displaced persons to voluntary, safe and dignified return, restitution of housing, land and property, and ensure reparative justice including through reparations and compensation;

(j)??? Establish and support international registers of damage and reparations mechanisms prioritizing housing and land losses;

(k)??? Ensure that reconstruction processes are rights-based, participatory, non-discriminatory and preserve the social, cultural and territorial integrity of affected communities and based on the right to self-determination.

?????????????????????? *? The present report is being issued without formal editing.

??????????????????????? [1]?? See communications , , and ISR 11/2025; ※Ukraine: UN expert seriously concerned by housing rights violations§, 9 March 2022 and? ※Myanmar: over 50,000 exposed to forced evictions and housing destruction, say UN experts§, 2 December 2022, ※Domicide: the mass destruction of homes should be a crime against humanity§, New York Times, 29 January 2024. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/29/opinion/destruction-of-homes-crime-domicide.html.

??????????????????????? [2] ? AL ISR (25.2025).

??????????????????????? [3] ? A/77/190.

??????????????????????? [4] ? World Bank et al., Gaza and West Bank interim rapid damage and needs assessment, February 2024, p. 26.

??????????????????????? [5]?? See for example, https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/gaza-protection-cluster-snapshot-protection-monitoring-reporting-period-15-january-3-february-2026.

??????????????????????? [6] ? .

??????????????????????? [7] ? See, among others, A/80/337 and A/HRC/60/CRP.3.

??????????????????????? [8]?? See e.g., .

??????????????????????? [9]?? .

?????????????????????? [10] ? .

?????????????????????? [11] ? Ibid.

?????????????????????? [12] ? Haaretz, ＆I did it for the money, then for revenge＊: Israeli＊s profit from raging Gaza. 28 July 2025.

?????????????????????? [13] ? .

?????????????????????? [14] ? .

?????????????????????? [15]?? See? .

?????????????????????? [16] ? See A/HRC/56/CRP.4, para 75.

?????????????????????? [17] ? https://www.ochaopt.org/content/report-humanitarian-response-un-and-humanitarian-partners-during-phase-one-ceasefire.

?????????????????????? [18] ? .

?????????????????????? [19] ? ; .

?????????????????????? [20] ? .

?????????????????????? [21] ? .

?????????????????????? [22] ? https://www.unocha.org/publications/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/humanitarian-situation-update-355-gaza-strip.

?????????????????????? [23]?? .

?????????????????????? [24]?? .

?????????????????????? [25] ? .

?????????????????????? [26]?? .

?????????????????????? [27]?? .

?????????????????????? [28]?? .

?????????????????????? [29]?? .

?????????????????????? [30] ? .

?????????????????????? [31] ? See for example: and more recently: .

?????????????????????? [32]?? .

?????????????????????? [33]?? /unispal/document/unctad-report-10sep24/.

?????????????????????? [34] ? A/HRC/52/28.

?????????????????????? [35] ? A/HRC/60/CRP.3.


Document symbol:
Download Document Files: /unispal/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/g2602540.pdf
Document Type: Report
Document Sources: Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing
Subject: Gaza Strip, House demolitions
Publication Date: 26/02/2026
URL source: