In international law, journalists are considered civilians; combatants are obliged to ensure their safety
Ismail al-Ghoul and his cameraman Rami al-Rifi were observing the conflict-zone-reporting best practice, as they motored back from their assignment on the last day of July. Having reported issues facing the displaced people of northern Gaza, they were leaving the scene of greatest danger. Blast vests bearing the insignia "PRESS" protected their bodies. Minutes earlier they had updated the Al Jazeera newsroom with their location.
- What we know about the IDF strike?
None of this would save their lives when an Israeli drone strike blasted their car. The explosion blew off al-Ghoul's head – an image subsequently shared on social media. Al-Rifi, and Khalid Shawa, a boy who happened to be passing by on a bicycle, also died instantly.
Unusually, we know that the killing was deliberate – because the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has admitted as much.
The IDF justified the assassination, arguing that the journalist's name appears on a list of "senior Hamas officers" that it captured earlier in the conflict. This allegation is strenuously denied by al-Ghoul's family, his employer and his union. And, IDF "evidence" in similar cases has appeared questionable. Indeed, Al-Ghoul spent enough time "on camera" that his capacity outside journalism would have been limited.
Critically, however, he was arrested by Israeli soldiers in March and held for 12 hours before being released without a charge. Surely, if the evidence of his Hamas membership justified his killing, there must have been sufficient basis for his prosecution?
This admission of targeting confirms much of what have for months been swirling allegations about IDF operations. We know that it has software – Pegasus – that secretly invades mobile phones and shares its user's locations, communications and the identities of those who they meet.
We know that the IDF uses software called "Lavender" that deploys AI to sort operational intelligence and suggest targets for assassination. A further tool, "The Gospel", uploads targets' geo locations to killer drones dramatically faster than had been possible with manual programming.
- More than 12% of Gazan journalists lost their lives
Alongside this technological capability is the extraordinary number of journalists who have been killed in Gaza since Oct. 7. The most conservative tally is around 120, some believe that as many as 165 Gazan reporters have perished since Oct. 7. This is dwarfed by the total death toll in Gaza, now somewhere around 40,000 victims. It is the mortality rate among journalists that is really striking. There were approximately 1,000 journalists in Gaza at the start of the conflict – more than 12% have now lost their lives.
This extraordinary rate of killing, and the precision targeting to which the IDF has admitted, points to a simple and awful conclusion. But there is more.
Since the outset of the conflict the Israeli government has barred international reporters from entering Gaza – despite hundreds petitioning to be admitted. It has also threatened to remove funding from newspapers such as Haaretz, shut down Al Jazeera's operation in Israel, and disabled the internet at key moments.
And, following the law is not the IDF way either. When the United Nations investigated the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh, its report concluded: “The Israeli security forces used lethal force without justification under international human rights law and intentionally or recklessly violated the right to life of Shireen Abu Akleh.”
But why target journalists in this way? The only plausible explanation is that this is an attempt to control the war narrative, and show that the IDF takes out civilian targets at will.
In international law, journalists are considered civilians; combatants are obliged to ensure their safety. The IDF's bloody campaign is in clear contravention of this – but whether the institutions of international law will bring anyone to justice remains to be seen. The International Criminal Court's (ICC) lead prosecutor, Karim Khan, displayed bravery in May when he issued arrest warrants for the Israeli and Hamas leadership. If he sees these cases through to satisfactory conclusions he will have shown himself as one of the greatest jurists of our age.
Justice, if it comes, will be no comfort to al-Ghoul and al-Rifi. They have distinguished themselves, however, by standing up to the most horrific force ever visited upon journalists and continuing to act as the world's eyes and ears. There is no consolation for them – but they deserve celebration; their colleagues who continue this work deserve our support.
