On October 19, an Israeli bombardment destroyed a building on the university campus. The St. Porphyry Greek Orthodox Church sits in the heart of the old city of the capital. About 450 members of the small Christian community in the city were seeking refuge there. The attack left 18 civilians dead and 12 injured. The oldest victim was 80 years old, and the youngest a few months old.
Amnesty International conducted a detailed review of the available evidence, including videos and testimonies, and found no indication that the church site was a legitimate military target. The organization concludes that the incident should be investigated as a potential war crime by the International Criminal Court.
The Israel Defense Forces published a drone video on social media that appeared to show an air strike on a building within the church grounds. The official claim from Tsahal stated that the drones targeted the command and control center of a Hamas unit firing rockets and mortars at Israel, but the video did not demonstrate the presence of a valid military target. Modern militaries employ legal teams to approve operations, and in this case the Military Prosecutor’s Office would be responsible for justifications. The video was removed from networks shortly after its posting.
Amnesty International preserved the footage and analyzed it to verify authenticity. The organization confirmed the location matched the church bombing and examined raw clips of the massacre recorded after the strike, speaking to multiple witnesses and reviewing satellite imagery from before and after the attack. A weapons expert identified the ammunition as large caliber and directed at the civilian-occupied building where the dead and wounded sought shelter.
A spokesperson for Amnesty International, Maria Pastor, explained that even if a site were a military target, international humanitarian law requires civilian populations to be warned or evacuated first.
The church site had reportedly hosted hundreds of civilians displaced by the bombings. Tsahal was aware of their presence. Amnesty International argues that the decision to attack a religious site known to shelter displaced people was reckless and could amount to a war crime, even if a nearby military target were suspected.
Attack on a dwelling crowded with civilians
Human rights groups and lawyers working with the International Criminal Court have been tracking the situation for weeks, documenting incidents where international law may have been violated. Each war crime case is assessed against laws defining lawful targets and protected civilians. The Hague’s Chief Prosecutor has reminded Israeli counsel that any attack on civilian homes, hospitals, schools, or bakeries requires robust justification and clear evidence of legitimate military necessity.
Amnesty International has examined in greater depth a massacre from October 20 in which Israeli air power reportedly struck a residence in the Al Nuseyrat refugee camp in central Gaza. The Al Aydi family and others nearby suffered heavy losses, with 28 civilians killed, including 12 children. Surviving relatives described a sudden collapse and the devastation that followed, while the family’s work permits in Israel drew attention to security considerations surrounding movements and checks for extended families.
One survivor recalled the moment the house collapsed and the remaining family members were left to search through the rubble where many relatives had been sheltering. The account underscores the human cost of the bombardment.
A level never seen before
According to Maria Pastor, the organization has documented war crimes in Gaza in a manner comparable to records kept during the Ukraine conflict. The violence, scale, and nature of the events have prompted comparisons to historical mass-casualty campaigns, suggesting an intensification of hostilities not seen in recent times.
International law requires a clear separation between civilians and military targets. Direct attacks on civilians or civilian objects are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks that endanger or kill civilians are war crimes. Amnesty International found no evidence of legitimate military targets in the areas surrounding the churches and homes involved in the two strikes. The presence of civilians in the affected buildings heightens concerns about civilian-targeted harm.
The organization argues that when a military target is pursued, all reasonable steps must be taken to minimize civilian harm. This includes confirming target existence, selecting methods and means that reduce civilian risk, assessing proportionality, giving advance notice when feasible, and stopping an attack if it becomes unjustified.
International humanitarian law also obliges armed groups to safeguard civilians by avoiding or minimising the placement of military objectives in densely populated zones. This standard has been called into question in the current round of fighting, which has claimed many civilian lives and left a deep toll on communities across the region, including the city center where mass casualties have been reported.