Hamas’s 1988 charter calls for armed struggle and frames the conflict in religious terms. Its 2017 political document accepts a state on the 1967 lines as a national consensus while rejecting recognition of Israel and insisting on the liberation of all the land. On October 7, 2023, Hamas-led forces deliberately targeted civilians, according to the UN Commission of Inquiry, which also found war crimes.
Hamas’s 1988 and 2017 documents
The 1988 charter identifies the movement as an Islamic resistance movement. Article 7 invokes a hadith about Muslims fighting Jews. The English translation of the 1988 charter contains the article’s wording.
In its 2017 Document of General Principles and Policies, Hamas said it accepted a state on the 1967 lines as a “national consensus,” while refusing to recognize Israel and retaining a claim to all the land. The English translation of the 2017 document sets out these positions.
The October 7 attack
The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded that Hamas led and coordinated the October 7 attacks, in which civilians were intentionally targeted. It found that members of Hamas’s military wing, other armed groups and participating civilians committed war crimes, including murder, intentional attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. The Commission’s report to the Human Rights Council details its findings.
The Genocide Convention defines genocide as specified acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such. That specific intent distinguishes genocide from war crimes such as murder and intentional attacks on civilians. The Commission’s findings characterize the October 7 conduct as war crimes.
Genocide’s legal elements
Genocide requires at least one prohibited act and the specific intent to destroy a protected group, in whole or in part, as such. Statements by leaders and organizational documents, the choice of targets, and the conduct of operations are among the matters assessed under that standard. For the Convention’s test, see the legal definition and intent standard. The ICJ’s provisional measures and the final merits decision are described in the case status.