Experts of the Committee on the Rights of the Child Acknowledge Israel’s Efforts for Internally Displaced Children since 7 October, Ask about Mental Health Treatment for Children Traumatised by the War and the Protection of Children in Gaza
The Committee on the Rights of the Child today concluded its review of the combined fifth and sixth periodic report of Israel, with Committee Experts acknowledging the State’s efforts to assist internally displaced children, while asking about the mental health treatment for children traumatised by the war, and how the State was taking measures to protect children in Gaza.
Ann Skelton, Committee Expert and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said the Committee acknowledged the efforts that Israel had made for children who were internally displaced in Israel following the 7 October attacks. Had they been able to return safely to where they were living before? What support had Israel provided for those who had not or could not?
Bragi Gudbrandsson, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said the Committee was deeply sorry for Israel’s loss on 7 October. At the same time, their hearts went out to the children of Gaza, thousands who had lost their lives, were injured, and had lost their families.
Mr. Gudbrandsson said by far, the greatest health challenge Israel now had to deal with was mental health. It was estimated that almost 20,000 children were suffering from mental health issues. Had the State taken any steps to expand manpower infrastructure in mental health or expand the range of community-based mental health treatments? Had steps been taken to ensure that the needs of children at risk were met?
Mr. Gudbrandsson also said that children had consistently comprised around 40 per cent of the total fatalities in Gaza since 7 October, now estimated to be at 17,000 child deaths; could the State party elaborate on the measures and policies in place to protect children in densely populated areas during military operations, in accordance with international humanitarian law? The State party maintained that it respected the principles of international humanitarian law, and the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality in carrying out military attacks. Yet the application of weapons with wide-area effects in residential buildings and houses, where extended and multigenerational families lived, raised concerns about the protection of civilians. Could the State party detail the steps taken to minimise civilian and child casualties in such areas?
The delegation said over 17,000 children had been provided with mental and social support since 7 October. Hundreds of mental health professionals had been trained in issues of cultural sensitivity and trauma awareness. Israel prioritised addressing mental health cases of children in a timely manner. No media reporters or photographers were allowed into the facilities which received children back from captivity. The State was aware of the burden this could have on children and the young population as a whole and were looking at how to handle this issue better in the future.
The delegation said Hamas purposely sought to drag fighting into the civilian domain, as part of their strategy to ensure the international community condemned Israel. They had built an extensive network of tunnels, bringing fighting to the heart of civilians. Israel’s military operations were committed to the fundamental principles of the law of armed conflict, including distinction, proportionality and precaution. The Israeli Defence Forces had put in place detailed regulations with sensitive sites, including hospitals, schools, power stations and United Nations facilities. The Israeli Defence Forces regularly issued announcements through multiple channels warning civilians of attacks. However, Hamas had prevented civilians from leaving these areas to exploit civilian casualties.
Daniel Meron, Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations Office at Geneva and co-head of the delegation, presenting the report, said Israel was engaged in a multifront war, forced upon the country on 7 October with the worst massacre against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. Today, 101 hostages, including two little children, remained in Gaza. The reality for children and youth in Israel had changed completely since 7 October. Children could not thrive under the brutal grip of a savage terrorist regime, Hamas. It was high time that the multilateral arena took a resolute stance against terrorism. This was key for the possibility of a better future for Israeli and Palestinian children alike.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Gudbrandsson thanked the delegation for the information provided but was disappointed that Israel had not replied to questions relating to the Convention in Palestine, including Gaza. Israel’s responses on respect of international humanitarian laws, and to the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality when carrying out military attacks, were noted. In light of the over 40,000 civilian deaths in Gaza, including more than 17,000 children, he was sorry to say that he had difficulties in comprehending this statement. The Committee called for the war in Gaza to end and the hostages to be returned.
In his concluding remarks, Itamar Donenfeld, Director General of the Ministry of Justice of Israel and co-head of the delegation, thanked the Committee Experts for their engagement over the past two days. Israel called on the Committee to avoid making factually incorrect statements like the ones made during the dialogue, and ensure that its statements and reports were objective and free from any political bias. The State would carefully consider non-political and unbiased recommendations concerning the protection of children in Israel.
Ms. Skelton, in concluding remarks, said the Committee had repeatedly called for the release of hostages, as well as the facilitation of humanitarian aid access into Gaza. Children in Gaza and Israel were suffering unspeakable horrors and ending the war was the only way to allow them to grow up in an atmosphere of peace.
The delegation of Israel was comprised of representatives of the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Health; the Ministry of Welfare and Social Services; the Ministry of Education; the Israel Defence Forces; and the Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s ninety-seventh session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. this afternoon, Wednesday, 4 September, to begin its consideration of the combined fifth and sixth periodic report of Armenia (CRC/C/ARM 5-6).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined fifth and sixth periodic report of Israel (CRC/C/ISR/5-6).
Presentation of Report
DANIEL MERON, Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations Office at Geneva and co-head of the delegation, said Israel was engaged in a multifront war, forced upon the country on 7 October with the worst massacre against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. Today, 101 hostages, including two little children, remained in Gaza. It was inconceivable that children were taken and held as hostages. This weekend, the State received devastating news that six hostages who had survived 11 months had been executed by Hamas. The reality for children and youth in Israel had changed completely since 7 October.
Since that date, rockets continued to indiscriminately target the civilian population in Israel from the north and south. Over 100,000 people were still displaced from their homes and communities. The toll that the unwanted war had taken on children in Israel and in Gaza was tragic. It was important to remember that Hamas terrorism was the first and foremost cause of suffering in Gaza. Israel had repeatedly asserted its commitment to uphold international humanitarian law. A polio vaccination campaign began this week in Central Gaza, in full coordination with Israel.
Children could not thrive under the brutal grip of a savage terrorist regime, Hamas.
The war against Hamas should not misguide these discussions from the purpose of discussing Israel’s implementation of the Convention. Israel worked in the international arena concerning the rights of children, and Israel’s civil society was contributing to children’s rights globally. Save a Child’s Heart, which received the United Nations Population Award in 2018, treated children suffering from heart disease who had little access to care in their own countries. Some 7,000 children from 70 countries had been treated since 1995, half of them Palestinians.
Mr. Meron concluded by stating that Israel maintained that human rights conventions applied only within territories in which a State applied its sovereignty. In the current state of international law, it was Israel’s view that the law of armed conflict and human rights law remained distinct and applied in different circumstances. The law of armed conflict was the relevant and specific applicable body of law in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
ITAMAR DONENFELD, Director General of the Ministry of Justice of Israel and co-head of the delegation, said the massacre of 7 October would forever stand as one of the darkest days in history. On that day, thousands of Hamas terrorists invaded Israel and murdered, raped, tortured and took civilians hostage. More than 1,200 people were slaughtered and more than 6,000 were injured. Over 250 people were taken hostage by Hamas that day, including 36 babies and children aged between 9 months and 18 years. No child should ever endure such horrors. Israel was also under a multi-front attack, orchestrated by Iran. One day after Hamas attacked, Hezbollah initiated an indiscriminate attack on Israeli civilians and continued to do so. Twelve young children had been murdered, following a direct hit by Hezbollah missiles on the soccer field where they played.
While Israel did everything in its power to avoid harming children, Hamas and Hezbollah did everything in their power to harm children and use them as human shields. The Committee must clearly condemn these terrorist organizations and support Israel in its military efforts to release all the hostages. The Committee should avoid making factually incorrect statements and ensure all reports were free from political bias. The rights of children must remain among the political agendas, and the Committee must respond to the atrocities with the full weight of its powers.
Israel had made efforts to improve children’s rights over the past few years. In 2022, a committee on children and youth rights was established. Following the 7 October massacre, a roundtable was established, focused on addressing the issue of children and youth in war. A report had been drafted, which presented the challenges faced by children since the massacre. This would be shared with the Committee.
Approximately 20,000 children and youth sustained psychological and physical damage as a result of the war. Tens of thousands of children continued to be displaced by the war. Several pieces of legislation adopted included the 2016 foster care law and the 2020 amendment to the legal capacity and guardianship law. An online protection hotline was established, providing protection support by police officers and the Government for children and youth who were victims of violence. The Government was committed to fostering strong partnerships with civil society organizations and maintained an open dialogue with Israel’s Youth Council. The delegation stood ready for a constructive and open dialogue.
Questions by Committee Experts
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said it was the view of the Committee that international human rights law and international humanitarian law were applicable in the occupied Palestinian territory, namely Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. It followed that Israel should act according to the obligations entailed in the Convention, and refrain from acts contrary to the Convention and its Optional Protocols. It was clearly stated that Israel continued to reject the Committee’s legal interpretation regarding its obligations of the Convention. However, in the replies to the list of issues, Israel recognised the State’s obligations under international humanitarian law and maintained that the State party applied the rules derived from the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality in carrying out military attacks.
The Committee would conduct the review in line with this understanding, first addressing clusters one to six, and secondly clusters seven to 11. These questions would cover the situation of children living in Israel, as well as some of the historic child rights issues in the occupied territories. Finally, the Committee wished to submit questions in relation to Israel’s obligations with regard to the military operation in Gaza and the West Bank, which the delegation was expected to answer tomorrow morning. The Committee was deeply sorry for Israel’s loss on 7 October. At the same time, their hearts went out to the children of Gaza, thousands who had lost their lives, were injured, and had lost their families.
Had the State party taken any steps to revise the Basic Law in line with the recommendations by other treaty bodies? Had any measures been taken to repeal discriminatory laws and policies that disadvantaged non-Jewish children, ensuring that all children in Israel had equal rights and opportunities?
In 2019, Guidelines were developed for the law on the implementation of the indication of information regarding legislation influences on the rights of the child 2002-5762. The Committee welcomed this legislation. Did the implementation of the Guidelines stipulate mandatory child-rights impact assessment procedures for policies relevant to children? How were they applied in practice? Had they resulted in changes in legislation and policy which strengthened the rights of children in Israel?
The State party had not developed and adopted a comprehensive policy and action plan on children’s rights; did such a policy exist? Were there regular assessments and evaluations made on the implementation of policies regarding children?
Had the Israeli Government considered establishing a human rights institution in line with the Paris Principles? What avenues were currently available for children to access justice if their rights were violated? Had the State party considered implementing child rights-based budgeting, especially in regard to marginalised children, including Bedouin children? The Committee was deeply concerned about legislation which restricted the activities of civil society organizations working on children’s rights. What measures had been taken to ensure that laws and anti-terrorist legislation were in line with the rule of law and human rights?
Mr. Gudbrandsson welcomed the many recently introduced multidisciplinary and evidence-based services with the aim of supporting families at risk of separation. Were these services accessible for all Israeli citizens irrespective of their ethnicity and where they lived? What was the availability and access to childcare facilities and afterschool care for Palestinian, Bedouin, asylum-seeking and migrant children?
The Israeli family unification ban denied many children born from parents with mixed identity cards from Israel, East Jerusalem and or the West Bank from their rights to enjoy their childhood and violated their rights to maintain contact with their parents. The Committee, along with other human rights treaty bodies, had called on Israel to repeal this law. Could data be provided on the total number of children affected by the ban? What measures was the State party taking to address the harmful impacts of the family unification ban on children?
Mr. Gudbrandsson welcomed the 2016 Foster Care Act, and the Ministry of Welfare Guidelines which stated that children under the age of eight should be placed in foster care. However, it was concerning that in practice only a small proportion of children were placed in foster care compared to those placed in residential institutions. Did the State of Israel have a deinstitutionalisation policy in line with international standards? What was the explanation for this gap between policy and practice? Had measures been taken to strengthen the foster care system, including through measures to facilitate kafala placement for the Palestinian and Bedouin children in Israel? What measures were in place to address the lack of permanency in alternative care, the lack of post care support, and delays in adoption processes?
RINCHEN CHOPHEL, Committee Expert and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said there had been important amendments to Israel’s legislation, including to the 2000 law. What steps were being taken to eliminate discrimination against all disadvantaged children. What steps were being taken in relation to the vulnerability of Palestinian girls regarding violence committed by defence forces? What measures were being taken to promote the meaningful participation of children in school settings and in policy making?
Mr. Chophel noted that a number of measures had been taken to support child victims of violence, including those with disabilities. What had been done to respond to cases of violence against children? How effectively were these cases investigated? How were perpetrators brought to justice? What measures were being adopted to reinforce the prohibition of corporal punishment in all settings? What measures were in place to promote positive forms of child rearing?
It was concerning that marriage at the age of 16 could still be granted by a court in exceptional circumstances. Were there any plans to raise the age limit of marriage to 18, without exception? The Committee remained gravely concerned about reports of torture of Palestinian children in the occupied Palestinian territory, including denial of food, water, electric shocks, and physical and sexual violence, among others. What measures were being taken to end all forms of torture and ill treatment, including against Palestinian children and children in the occupied Palestinian territory? How was it ensured that all branches of the armed security forces did not carry out torture and ill treatment and respected humanitarian law? What steps were being taken to ensure that national-level initiatives were in harmony with the Optional Protocol? The measures to expand the eligibility criteria for disability benefits was noted with appreciation.
LUIS PEDERNERA, Committee Expert and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said there had been insufficient information from the State party on how it implemented several recommendations. What had happened regarding the recommendation on removing the prohibition on granting Israeli citizenship to children born to one Israeli and one parent from the occupied Palestinian territory? Could the delegation comment on whether Israel would overturn its decision not to process requests for residence of Palestinian children since 2000? What had been done to address the effects that the arbitrary revocation of residence and identity permits of people living in East Jerusalem had on thousands of unregistered Palestinian children by preventing them from accessing health services, education and any other type of social benefits, and preventing thousands of children from living with their parents?
The Committee had made a recommendation relating to the Israeli practice towards the children of migrants born in the State party, who were given a handwritten note rather than a birth certificate, with the name of the father not indicated. Could an update on the judicial rulings in this regard be provided? What was the status of implementation of the process of computerisation of the registry? What had been done in cases where the notification of birth was denied to migrant families who were unable to pay for hospitalisation costs? What measures were being taken to ensure children had full access to identity? The system of not issuing identity documents and passports or permits prevented access to rights, freedom of movement, and did not guarantee the right to identity of thousands of children. What was the reason behind this system?
The repression of demonstrations and arrests was a matter of concern. What precautions was the State taking to ensure children could uphold their right to expression and peaceful assembly? How many children had been arrested and tried for peacefully protesting? Had sanctions been applied to members of security forces who used disproportionate force in protests? What other measures were being taken to hold platforms and applications accountable when they violated children's rights? What steps were being taken for digital access and inclusion for children, particularly Palestinian and Bedouin children, and to promote equity and affordability of online services and connectivity?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Ministry of Welfare had issued a circular which stated they preferred children to be placed in foster care, as opposed to residential placements. Since the 2016 foster care law was introduced, foster care had increased in the country and the State had managed to register a large number of foster care placements, including relatives. There were now more children who had been placed with relatives than those with non-relatives. Foster families were checked using a computerised system, and everything was closely supervised. Israel had taken many steps in the last few years to increase and improve the supervision of institutions, including through unannounced visits. Every visit was recorded and monitored in a centralised system.
The childcare foster law of 2016 set up a Children and Youth Complaints Commission. There was now a government statutory body that was charged with investigating any complaints of children living in a residential placement, including foster care. This gave legal powers to investigators to investigate and report. Over 90 per cent of the complaints to the Commissioner were received directly from children. Children had been involved in creating the working practices of the Commission to ensure that the system was suitable. There were 800 child protection workers attached to local authority departments. Children who faced neglect had their cases investigated by social workers, and then had cases referred to child justice centres. There were eight child justice centres spread across the country. In these centres, children were assessed and received assistance.
The core principles of the Convention were being incorporated more and more into Israel’s legislation. A guideline by the Deputy Attorney General had been issued which stated that information needed to be provided regarding the impact of legislation on the rights of the child. According to the guideline, legislative authorities needed to establish the extent of impact which a Government bill could have on child rights. Any child born in Israel was documented by the hospital. Hospitals provided parents with a document of birth, including the parents’ names. For children born to unmarried parents, where the mother was single, the father needed to identify himself and produce an identity card. Children born to foreigners were issued with a notice of live birth and could receive a replication of an application of live birth upon request. In December 2013, the minimum marital age was raised from 17 to 18. Exceptions only applied if this was in the child’s best interest. The court would hear from the child and undertake a survey by a social worker.
The principle of equality was a core principle in Israel’s justice system, which applied rights equally to all, including minority groups, according to the Basic Law. The Government Coordination Unit was established in 2022 and it recognised the importance of hearing children and youth when formulating policies that affected them. Youth representatives were routinely involved in round tables. Since 2020, the Unit had been leading a programme on the release of Israeli youth from imprisonment to combat the rate of reimprisonment. A research evaluation of the programme revealed a significant increase of minors released with a structural rehabilitation plan. Children involved in criminal proceedings were invited to have their eligibility considered for an alternative to imprisonment. In January 2016, a police authority was established to prevent online crime and violence against children. Addressing online sexual abuse and child prostitution was one of the objectives of this unit. During the past few years, many efforts had been made to locate suspects, some of which had yielded major indictments.
Israeli citizenship could only be revoked through a court procedure. There had been no cases of children in Israel whose citizenship had been revoked. There was no prohibition in Israel on demonstrations; demonstrations took place daily in the country. Generally, permanent residents received the same rights as citizens, with some exceptions. Every inmate could file a complaint concerning conditions of detention, including to the Prison Ombudsman. Any claim of illegal use of force by a warden was immediately reported and escalated.
The Permanent Mission of Israel had invited the Committee to recognise the horrific crimes of Hamas by reviewing video footage, but the Committee had declined.
A speaker from the delegation then said she was the owner of a video from 7 October, which showed the horror and the massacre of her son and husband, and almost 700 people who were assassinated, raped, tortured and burnt. Her husband and eldest son had been killed and the trauma from this had deeply impacted her three other children. Her youngest child was blind in one eye and had almost died due to the bombs which had gone off.
The speaker said that children in Israel were living with trauma and had been scarred for life. There were many citizens and children in Gaza who were innocent, but so were Israelis. This needed to be understood. Hamas were cruel terrorists. There were two peoples, Palestinian people who were stuck in between and were fed up and wanted to live in peace, as well as Israeli Jews, Muslims, Christians and others who wanted to continue to live in Israel in peace. The south of Israel, 400 metres from Gaza where the speaker lived, had been attacked by rockets since 2001. Their children were traumatised. Persons and children could not go outside as a normal child should be able to do.
The Israeli people had always wanted to live in peace with their neighbours in Gaza and other towns. Jews and Muslims lived together. They did not want the war and the hatred. Hamas and Hezbollah were the problems. An Israeli soldier would never touch Palestinian children and kill them because they were Palestinians and not Jewish. It was important to change the narrative in the dialogue and understand the reality of Israel. The speaker implored the Committee to look at the video and see what happened in Israel on 7 October. This was life in Israel and in Gaza. The Committee needed to take responsibility to understand the problems being faced in Israel and the horror being spread by Hamas. The Israeli people were not killers; they were fighting to protect themselves and their children. There were not enough professionals to take away the suffering, nightmares and trauma of the children.
Questions by Committee Experts
ANN SKELTON, Committee Chairperson and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, thanked the speaker for coming and for sharing her story. She thanked the speaker for reminding the Committee about the innocence of Israeli children and the innocence of all children.
A Committee Expert acknowledged what the speaker had shared. Could the delegation comment on the children of hostages who were abducted for a few hours. They had had a lot of visibility in the media. What were the ethical considerations that should be considered concerning these children who were constantly in the media? How did this affect their mental health? It was ironic that the one third of the children who had been involved in the Save the Heart children were in Gaza, but could not receive the follow-up care they needed. The Expert implored the State to allow these children to receive the necessary care.
An Expert thanked the speaker for her courage. Why was there so much deprivation of liberty in Israel, when this should be the last resort? What prevented Israel from having an independent body in line with the Paris Principles which could visit places of deprivation of liberty?
Another Expert said the Committee was concerned about the situation of all children. They wanted children to be able to live together peacefully. The human rights institution seemed to lack financial means, meaning they lacked independence. What was being done to address this lack of independence? Were these mechanisms also accessible for Palestinian children? War-related expenditure had exceeded 80 billion shekels, and was expected to reach 20 per cent of Israeli gross domestic product. What was the Government doing to ensure the budgets devoted to social policies, including family support, were not affected by this? There was a rise in the violence committed in relation to settlers, which children were witnessing. What was being done to address the violence that these children were witnessing and facing on a daily basis?
A Committee Expert asked if there were enough medical staff to deal with children who had been traumatised? It seemed that there were several categories of children who benefited from the birth declaration. What happened to children born out of wedlock? Would this harm them in their future life? Why was the birth document handwritten? Could parents then go to the embassy to officially declare the birth of their child?
A Committee Expert expressed sincere condolences to the speaker. She was also a mother and understood her. Unfortunately, she was one of many, many mothers who all had to go through this and she hoped this would end soon. Israel was one of the most highly developed tech countries in the world. How were the developments regarding use of artificial intelligence in Israel? How was this technology used to protect children? How were children protected from these threats?
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said the general access to health care for the Palestinian/Bedouin population was concerning. In Bedouin communities, infant mortality rates were five to eight times higher than the average Jewish population. How did this group have access to health care, including cancer treatment? By far, the greatest health challenge Israel now had to deal with was mental health. It was estimated that almost 20,000 children were suffering from mental health issues. Had the State taken any steps to expand manpower infrastructure in mental health or expand the range of community-based mental health treatments? Had steps been taken to ensure that the needs of children at risk were met?
Israel continued to deny Palestinians access to medical care by restricting freedom of movement through Israel’s permit system. According to the World Health Organization, in 2021, 47 per cent of patients from Gaza did not receive a timely medical exit permit to access their treatments in hospitals in East Jerusalem and elsewhere. Why was it not possible to issue long-term permits for patients with diseases, including cancer and kidney failure? Children were dying because of this system. Sources had revealed that since 2018, more than 180 parents had been denied being present for medical treatment with their children; how did this comply with the Convention? The forcible invasions by Israel military or police into the homes of Palestinian families were intensive. Was the Government aware of the harmful mental health impact of these home raids on children?
LUIS PEDERNERA, Committee Expert and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said nearly 60 per cent of Bedouin families in the Naqab lived in poverty compared to the 20 per cent of Israel’s general population. What measures were being taken to address the urgent food insecurity situation of the Bedouin? There was a bill to amend the national insurance law to deny payments and limit access of employment to asylum seeking children, which was being implemented in 17 cities. Did the State intend to revise this legislation so there was proper access for these excluded groups?
The climate cost of the first 60 days of Israel's military response was equivalent to burning at least 150,000 tons of coal, according to a Guardian article. Why had there been a cut in the environmental budget? How was the State monitoring this situation?
ANN SKELTON, Committee Chairperson and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said that in its 2013 concluding observations, the Committee observed that there was a “segregated” education system with a lower investment in the education of Palestinian children. Since then, how had the budget been reallocated to provide equity in the schooling system? In Jerusalem in 2013, it was recorded that there were 1,000 classrooms lacking in East Jerusalem. It was understood that the Jerusalem Municipality issued a five-year plan from 2018 to 2022 to provide 5,000 classrooms and kindergartens, half in East Jerusalem and half in West Jerusalem. According to the reply to the list of issues, the shortage of classrooms currently stood at 2,000 in East Jerusalem and a further 2,000 in West Jerusalem. What had happened under the plan? How many classes had been built?
In its 2013 concluding observations, the Committee had expressed its concern about demolitions of schools for Palestinian children living in the West Bank, and it had gotten worse of course since then. How many schools were demolished? What measures had been taken to provide alternative school infrastructure?
The Committee had received reports that there were many incidents of violence being experienced by children on the way to school or even in schools, often by settlers. Was anyone held criminally responsible? How was Israel’s new road map for the inclusion of children of Ethiopian descent in the education system? How was Israel advancing equal access to education for Bedouin children, particularly in the Naqab?
The Committee acknowledged the efforts that Israel had made for children who were internally displaced in Israel following the 7 October attacks. Had they been able to return safely to where they were living before? What support had Israel provided for those who had not or could not? Were any children ever granted refugee status? How were asylum claims for unaccompanied and separated children handled and who assisted these children? Could more information be provided about the current policy developments and the High Court case running on access to health insurance for children from Eritrea, Sudan and Ukraine? What was the State doing to provide a more durable status for asylum-seeking children?
The Committee had repeatedly urged Israel to put a stop to prevent the abductions, arbitrary arrests, and prolonged detention of large numbers of Palestinian adolescents by the Israeli armed and security forces. These detentions occurred in many cases without charge, trial, or legal representation. This situation was worsening. Another concern was the lack of information on the whereabouts of Palestinian adolescents held either in Israel or in the West Bank. What was being done about this?
In previous concluding observations, the Committee expressed concern about impunity regarding the use of Palestinian children as human shields and informants. The Committee knew that this was happening on both sides, but as the Committee was reviewing Israel today, what was Israel doing to effectively enforce the prohibition of using children as human shields and informants? The 2024 report on children and armed conflict of the Secretary-General highlighted particular cases of boys being used to shield forces during law enforcement operations. What was Israel doing to effectively enforce the prohibition on the use of children as human shields.
Israel followed a policy of conscription. Did the committee that heard cases of conscientious objectors have any expertise to deal with children? Were they aware of the Convention and its Optional Protocols? This year, the Secretary-General included Israeli Armed and Security Forces in the annexure to his report that listed parties that committed grave violations affecting children in situations of armed conflict. Had the Government officially responded to this?
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said given that children had consistently comprised around 40 per cent of the total fatalities in Gaza since 7 October, now estimated to be at 17,000 child deaths, could the State party elaborate on the measures and policies in place to protect children in densely populated areas during military operations, in accordance with international humanitarian law? The State party maintained that it respected the principles of international humanitarian law, and the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality in carrying out military attacks. Yet the application of weapons with wide-area effects in residential buildings and houses, where extended and multigenerational families lived, raised concerns about the protection of civilians. Could the State party detail the steps taken to minimise civilian and child casualties in such areas? Could information be provided on measures taken with regard to the rulings of the International Criminal Court of Justice?
The Committee noted the positive development that there was a partial cessation of hostilities to allow for the provision of polio vaccines. The Committee was extremely worried by reports that a large majority of hospitals in Gaza had ceased operation, including the Al Shifa medical complex. What measures ensured the continued operation of the remaining hospitals serving children in Gaza and ensured that the medical evacuation of children was ensured when necessary? What steps had the State party taken to protect educational facilities from being targeted during conflicts? How would accountability be ensured for any violations of international humanitarian law related to attacks on schools?
Thousands of children had become disabled or were extremely traumatised as a result of the war; did the State party have plans to provide the care, rehabilitation and therapy that these children would need for the rest of their lives? The restrictions on the flow of essential humanitarian supplies, including food, were causing severe malnutrition among children. How was the State party working to prevent further malnutrition-related deaths and ensure access to food and treatment for affected children?
LUIS PEDERNERA, Committee Expert and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, asked how international law was being applied in situations involving children in regard to arrest procedures and restriction of movement in the West Bank? How were children being protected against the increased militarisation of operations in the West Bank? The Committee was deeply concerned that 1,179 structures in the West Bank had been destroyed, leading to the displacement of more than 1,100 minors. What were the reasons behind such actions? How could this be justified as part of international law?
What measures did the State party intend to implement to prevent and address violence by settlers and to ensure that perpetrators were held accountable? What efforts had the State party made to investigate and hold accountable those responsible for incidents in which restrictions on movement had caused harm or loss of life, such as the murder of a 17-year-old Palestinian-American boy? How did the State party intend to address the consequences of its military actions in the West Bank, including returning the bodies of Palestinian children to their families and ending restrictions on Palestinian funeral rituals?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the report on children at risk that was published in May 2023 was a report covering the whole continuum of care services in the community. Although a larger number of children under the age of eight were quoted in the report as being placed in residential institutions, upon checking the figures it was much less, with some children being placed in temporary settings. Israel believed children needed homes and should be at home whenever possible. Foster care and adoption were the next best options. The reasons children were removed from home were often not just to do with parenting ability, but also living conditions, poverty and spiral of debt, among others. A programme had been enacted to assist families with children in out-of-home placements, including small caseloads for social workers, positive contacts with each family, and a generous and flexible budget for each family within the programme. In some cases, children had returned home to their families under the programme. There were continued challenges to recruit foster families in the Arab population. Adoption was forbidden by Islam which meant there was sometimes confusion between a foster family and an adoptive family. A professional committee had been established, which studied all aspects of foster care and had provided recommendations to the Government.
Regarding children who had returned from Gaza; this was a sensitive issue. Children’s privacy should be protected, and they should not be exposed unnecessarily. However, if a parent agreed for their child to be interviewed, this was their prerogative. The children had taught them a lesson in that they did not need to be coddled after they returned. There were programmes in place to help children, including trauma-based interventions to improve their resilience and help their coping with the traumatic events they were experiencing. A programme was in place which provided a day-care of one day a week for children who required some psychiatric support.
Several sections of the penal law were dedicated to sexual abuse against children. Sexual actions with a child under the age of 14 was considered rape. There was also legislation against trafficking and pornography. Technological developments were considered within these offences. Recently, there had been convictions on the use of bots, using a real photo while the bot created nudity. The exploitation of any person in prostitution was prohibited in law, as was advertising prostitution and pimping. Under the law, the exploitation of a child constituted an aggravating circumstance, increasing the penalty for such offences. Roundtables had been held with Government ministries, enforcement authorities, and members of social services to combat child prostitution. A new law, which came into force in 2020, criminalised the consumption of prostitution. By law, children charged with criminal offences were entitled to free legal representation from public defenders, regardless of their financial situation.
Israel acted to make the Convention accessible to children in all languages, including Braille, when required. Early childhood education was very important, and extensive awareness raising had been done with parents on the importance of sending children to kindergarten. Many efforts had been made to increase the accessibility of early childhood education to Bedouin communities, including through the creation of 24 kindergartens. The Government was considering additional centres for services, and how to further integrate Bedouin pupils into Israeli society.
There was no separation or segregation of pupils of Ethiopian descent within Israeli education. A programme had been introduced which helped Ethiopian pupils integrate and reach the national average in Israeli schools. Education for peace programmes included developing positive communication skills and getting to know different cultures. This approach helped reduce tensions and impart values of tolerance and mutual respect. These programmes were conducted in both Jewish and Arab communities. There were also training courses which dealt with practices of diverse cultural competence, providing tools for cultural discourse.
The Israeli health system had faced great challenges since 7 October, taking in a huge number of casualties while still treating the general population. Israel did not have a separate military health system, and so all soldiers, including Arab, Jews and Palestinians, were treated in civilian hospitals. There had been a multi-layered approach to address the mental health issues being faced by children, with the first being resilience centres, located near the border line. These provided on the spot services to adults and children. Over 17,000 children had been provided with mental and social support since 7 October. Hundreds of mental health professionals had been trained in issues of cultural sensitivity and trauma awareness.
Ten intensive care units had been established to avoid suspension in treatment for major crisis cases. Israel prioritised addressing mental health cases of children in a timely manner. No media reporters or photographers were allowed into the facilities which received children back from captivity. The State was aware of the burden this could have on children and the young population as a whole, and were looking at how to handle this issue better in the future.
A new hospital was being built in the south of Israel which would be a strong academic facility and aid the Bedouin villages nearby. The State was aware of the need for health promotion activities for this population. Plans had been made to tackle issues as obesity, smoking and family planning in Bedouin communities.
The population in Jerusalem was entitled to receive health care as part of the law. There were seven Palestinian hospitals in East Jerusalem and three centres in West Jerusalem. In Jerusalem, there were psychiatric hospitals and many community-based services to address mental health. Most parts of Jerusalem were serviced by the national ambulance services, and some by the Palestinian Red Crescent. Both organizations were working to provide the best services available.
It was hoped that in the coming years, the birth registration system would be fully digitalised. From the beginning of the war, more than 50,000 permits were provided for the West Bank for Palestinians to enter East Jerusalem for treatment. The State was providing more than 120,000 permits from the West Bank. Many Gazan children with cancer were treated in Israeli hospitals. This was also true for children undergoing treatment through the Save the Heart Association. Work had been done with the United Nations Children’s Fund and other organizations to evacuate children for intense medical needs to other countries, including the United Arab Emirates, among others.
Pursuant to the interim agreement between Israel and Palestinians, the responsibility of education regarding Palestinians living in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip had been transferred to the Palestinian Authority. This meant that Israel was not charged with building new schools, hiring teachers and higher education. All these aspects were controlled and administered by the Palestinian Authority. The Gaza Strip had not been under Israeli control since 2005, following the implementation of Israel’s disengagement initiative. Even after the recent war, Israel was still not occupying Gaza as the conditions for belligerent occupation had not been met. As the armed forces of other democratic States had been experiencing, civilian deaths were a harsh fact of modern, urban warfare. In Gaza, these deaths were deliberately sought by Hamas to further its objective. Hamas had spent the last 17 years systemically embedding its operations throughout Gaza, viewing Palestinian civilians as expendable human shields.
Hamas purposely sought to drag fighting into the civilian domain, as part of their strategy to ensure the international community condemned Israel. They had built an extensive network of tunnels, bringing fighting to the heart of the civilians. The Israeli Defence Forces had discovered a tunnel shaft near and under schools which passed under the headquarters of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinians in the Near East. Some of the missiles fired by Hamas at Israel had landed within Gaza, exploding in hospitals and schools and causing civilian harm. The likelihood that many of these rockets had landed in dense urban areas suggested they were a significant cause of civilian casualties.
Israel was committed to bringing home the hostages in Gaza and defending its citizens and territory in a manner consistent with international law, despite the fact that other parties to the conflict violated these laws. Israel’s military operations were committed to the fundamental principles of the law of armed conflict, including distinction, proportionality and precaution. Israel was operating against Hamas, not against the civilian population. The Israeli Defence Forces had put in place detailed regulations with sensitive sites, including hospitals, schools, power stations and United Nations facilities. It could not be concluded that an attack on civilians was unlawful, due to the way Hamas operated within civilian infrastructure, as well as the participation of civilians in warfare. The Israeli Defence Forces regularly issued announcements through multiple channels, including social media, warning civilians of attacks. However, Hamas had prevented civilians from leaving these areas to exploit civilian casualties.
Questions by Committee Experts
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said information had been received that said 75 per cent of children who were out of home were in residential care; what were the correct figures? It seemed that children in care were far away from reaching a family environment; what was the truth in this matter? In cases of sexual abuse, was it possible for child victims to provide recorded statements? Why was there such a discrepancy between the health of the Bedouin community and the general population? It was pleasing to hear that there were measures being taken in regard to mental health issues. How many children were affected by the medical permit system? Why did children with chronic health diseases need to wait for health care?
LUIS PEDERNERA, Committee Expert and Member of the Country Taskforce for Israel, said the Committee believed that Israel had effective control of the occupied Palestinian territories. This had been stated in reviews by treaty bodies and in recommendations by the United Nations. He disagreed on the issue of proportionality, when the targets were children who were not a threat and were shot in the head by snipers or drones. When a child was playing outside or looking for food, how was the threat assessed? Could a sniper shoot the child in the head? According to the data available, 5,500 children were born a month. The hospitals in Gaza had been wiped out. This meant birth registration could not be guaranteed. How did the State intend to help these children to ensure they had access to an identity?
A Committee Expert asked if there were Jewish children in Israel who were also poor, or was it mainly other minorities? How did the Israeli State ensure children from different communities had access to their rights?
Another Expert asked if kafala, the equivalent of adoption, was regulated for Muslims? Was the care provided by foster families appropriately regulated? It was noted that measures had been set up to allow for the changing of sentences of deprivation of liberty, but in the cases of 21 children, they had chosen to stay in prison. Had Israel considered joining the third Optional Protocol to the Convention, on individual communications? What measures had been taken to alleviate the suffering of children in Gaza?
An Expert said it could be assumed that the bodies of many children were still under the rubble in Gaza. When would Israel remove the debris so bodies could be recovered and identified? What was the Government doing to reunite unaccompanied children with their parents or families? What was being done to protect the 20,000 orphans? What services would be provided to them? The Expert asked the Government to lift the blockade and allow aid to reach the population.
A Committee Expert said the Committee was concerned about all children wherever they were. Every single child in Gaza was living in incredibly stressful and violent conditions and would be traumatised for their entire lives. What were the plans of the State party to support the treatment of these children. At the end of April, Israel had dropped more bombs in Gaza than bombs were dropped in the Second World War - 70,000 tonnes of bombs and explosive devices. The United Nations assessed that the clearing of that rubble could take up to 14 years. Some bombs did not detonate straight away, but went off later, causing more death and destruction. What were the plans of the State party to support the clearing of the war region and prevent children from continuing to die once the war ended?
Another Expert asked if there were centres devoted to children who were suffering from mental health issues? What personnel, including psychologists, were working in these centres? How would the situation of birth registration be rectified so that every child had a birth certificate? If a child was born from an incestuous union or because of adultery and the man did not want to declare the child, what happened?
A Committee Expert said the Committee was extremely concerned about all of the children in the country and wanted to see peace. What exceptions were made to grant early marriage? What strategy was being implemented to eradicate the situation of early marriage? There had been reports of rape within ultra-orthodox groups. How many investigations were conducted based on these reports?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said Israel was sorry for the loss of life in the war, including children. This was terrible and no one wanted to see it. The allegations that Israel targeted children was preposterous and could not be accepted. Israel had a clear set of laws which instructed soldiers on opening fire. The State’s Defence Forces were conducting themselves in line with international law. They were making the clear distinction between civilians and combatants. Unfortunately, Hamas was embedded underneath the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinians in the Near East and in Palestinian schools and in Al-Shifa hospital, to drag the military into these situations.
Israel was not limiting humanitarian aid in Gaza; there were hundreds of thousands of trucks entering Gaza by various entrances. The war was being paused to allow the polio vaccination campaign to take place. The future of the children in Gaza was of concern. Israel prayed that they would not be under the control of Hamas in the future, and they would have a better life in the future.
For years, Israel had engaged with the representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of children in armed conflict, who had visited Israel in 2022. Israel had been critical of the reporting, which had not reported a single recruitment of Palestinian youth in fighting. Still, it had been Israel’s objective to cooperate. Israel being listed in the blacklist equated a law-abiding State with murderous organizations responsible for atrocities against children. It was the Secretary-General’s decision to list Israel in this shameful blacklist. This was a watershed moment in an otherwise positive history of cooperation with the United Nations mandate. At this stage, Israel was considering its future engagement on this issue.
A guideline had been developed which clearly listed what could not justify underage marriage, including cultural beliefs and pregnancy. Birth certificates held no details on the marital status of the parents. There was no distinction if a child was born to married or unmarried parents. Regarding children born to foreigners, the birth document was not handwritten. This had changed in recent years. A child had the right to be heard in certain proceedings in court. When a person was involved in terrorist activity against the State, their attachment to the State was questioned. Regarding the denial of benefits to their family members, including children, this would be examined. The eligibility belonged to the convicted person and not to their dependents.
The Government aimed to provide the Bedouin with residence in alternative areas in the case of unauthorised villages. A large majority of those residing in unauthorised areas would be able to continue to reside there, without relocating elsewhere. Israel was aware of the risks posed by artificial intelligence and government ministries were focusing on addressing some of these risks and developing an artificial intelligence strategy to carry out a comprehensive risk assessment before this technology was deployed.
An additional budget had been allocated to youth organizations to promote climate change initiatives. Currently, there were no pending requests filed by unaccompanied children for asylum. All security proceedings of Palestinians in the West Bank were held before military courts. Unfortunately, Palestinian minors were undergoing ideological radicalisation. At least four of the minor prisoners returned in the recent hostages’ deals took part in terrorist attacks. The Government was currently working on providing a grant to those without civil status.
Kafala was the Muslim equivalent of fostering, as issued by the Sharia courts. Foster care arrangements could be extended until the age of 21 and even beyond. Special permits were given to children under the age of eight to go to a non-foster care placement, but only if this was the last resort. The setting up of an institution for children under six was an unfortunate move, due to the shortage of foster families within the Arab population. The State was making efforts to break down confusion regarding fostering as opposed to adoption and encourage people within the Arab population to take children into their homes. Children under the age of 14 who were victims of crimes were interviewed by a special officer with social work training.
Hamas and its governing organs still had the power to exercise control over the health care system in Gaza. Due to the intense fighting in Gaza, the Israeli Defence Forces did not have control over Gaza’s health system, including birth registration. Every civilian death was a tragedy, especially the death of children. In the context of armed conflict, death to civilians did not necessarily indicate criminal conduct. So far, more than 1,000 incidents had been identified as incidents which required further investigation. In addition, 76 criminal investigations against Israeli Defence Force soldiers had been opened since the start of the hostilities, which were still ongoing. Israel utterly rejected the insinuated equivalence between Hamas’ use of civilians as human shields and the Israeli Defence Forces.
Israel and its forces were committed to facilitating the improvement of the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Before 7 October, there were only two crossings going from Israel to Gaza. Israel had opened three new land crossings and facilitated the delivery of airdrops of aid directly into Gaza. All aid going into Gaza was documented in a comprehensive list, which was available online. There were many challenges, particularly in the ability of the United Nations and other agencies to collect the aid and reach all intended areas.
Throughout the war, Israel had invested considerable efforts in monitoring the medical care in the Gaza Strip, and there were no restrictions on medical supplies entering this area. Despite the risks, Israel had permitted the delivery of equipment such as generators and had facilitated the construction of seven field hospitals for the benefit of the civilians in Gaza. Israel also facilitated the evacuation of thousands of sick and wounded persons for medical treatment abroad. A joint working group had been created with the World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund to vaccinate all 600,000 children under the age of 10. The Israeli Defence Forces would continue to map out the health situation in the Gaza Strip and would continue to support all activities to enhance the Gaza health system.
Concluding Remarks
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Israel, expressed appreciation for the dialogue, where sometimes emotions had run high. The Committee thanked the delegation for the information provided but was disappointed that Israel had not replied to questions relating to the Convention in Palestine, including Gaza. Israel’s responses on respect of international humanitarian laws, and to the principles of distinction, precaution and proportionality when carrying out military attacks, were noted. In light of the over 40,000 civilian deaths in Gaza, including more than 17,000 children, he was sorry to say that he had difficulties in comprehending this statement. The horrific Hamas terrorist attack of 7 October 2023, and the totally disproportionate response on behalf of Israel that followed in Gaza and the West Bank, was probably the darkest moment of modern history. It had fuelled a vicious cycle of violence in the region, and the future was unfortunately grim. The Committee called for the war in Gaza to end and the hostages to be returned.
ITAMAR DONENFELD, Director General of the Ministry of Justice of Israel and co-head of the delegation, thanked the Committee Experts for their engagement over the past two days. The discussion during the dialogue underscored that Israel remained fully committed to upholding the Convention, even in the face of ongoing terror. Israel called on the Committee to avoid making factually incorrect statements like the ones made during the dialogue and ensure that its statements and reports were objective and free from any political bias.
The State would carefully consider non-political and unbiased recommendations concerning the protection of children in Israel. The massacre of 7 October and the war forced on Israel had deeply affected Israel’s children and youth. The Committee needed to address the well-documented atrocities and clearly condemn Hamas and Hezbollah. The Committee should also support Israeli efforts to release all hostages, including children. Children’s rights should remain free from political agendas. Israel stood ready to work constructively with the Committee to advance the rights of children.
DANIEL MERON, Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations Office at Geneva and co-head of the delegation, thanked the Committee for the interactive dialogue. Israel took issues of children’s rights very seriously. In Judaism, children’s vulnerability obliged greater responsibility to be taken towards them. The delegation took note with regard to the Committee’s question concerning the implementation of the Convention and invited the Committee to view the footage from 7 October; 7 October was the darkest moment for the people of Israel since the Holocaust. Israel was forced into the war and wanted a cease-fire. Hamas had been rejecting this. Israel remained committed to its international obligations under the Convention.
ANN SKELTON, Committee Chairperson, said the Committee had repeatedly called for the release of hostages, as well as the facilitation of humanitarian aid access into Gaza. The Convention recognised that children should grow up in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding. Children in Gaza and Israel were suffering unspeakable horrors and ending the war was the only way to allow them to grow up in an atmosphere of peace.
_____
CRC.24.024E