Reports of draft resolution granting Board of Peace ‘sweeping immunity’ highly concerning
The ‘Board of Peace’ meeting in Washington on 19 February 2026
Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor reports on 30 June 2026:
The Guardian’s recent report on a draft resolution granting legal immunity to the Board of Peace, its members, staff, contractors, and associated forces for actions in the Gaza Strip is highly concerning. The draft also permits the Board to obtain Palestinian public property “free of charge”.
This setup would create a de facto authority in the Gaza Strip that compromises Palestinian residents’ rights and safety, operating outside judicial oversight. It would legitimise the illegal use of public assets in an occupied area and place Gaza’s administration, its resources, and victims’ rights within a system protected from accountability.
The draft proposes providing broad legal protection against arrest, detention, and judicial action to the Board, its staff, the High Representative’s office, technocrats, international forces, and contractors working in Gaza. Recent reports also indicate that the draft proposes directing claims involving death, injury, illness, or property damage to an internal mechanism under the Board’s authority.
Adopting these arrangements would significantly harm Palestinians’ access to justice and deny victims the opportunity to present their claims to an independent, impartial body. A mechanism cannot be deemed effective or fair if the same party responsible for violations also handles and judges victims’ complaints. The lack of independent accountability not only denies victims justice but also fosters an oversight-free environment. This setting allows the use of broad powers within the Gaza Strip without proper checks and sustains a systemic culture of impunity.
Any international arrangements within the Gaza Strip should be based on the obligation to safeguard Palestinians, address the harm they’ve suffered, support their recovery from the severe crimes and violations committed against them, and ensure their entitlement to justice and accountability.
These arrangements should not serve as a way to introduce new actors who gain unchecked power over the population, their resources, and public facilities, thus replicating the patterns of control and impunity that Israel has historically employed and continues to employ in its ongoing genocide against Gaza’s population.
Iraq’s post-2003 experience clearly demonstrates the risks of granting broad immunity from local courts to transitional authorities, foreign forces, or related contractors. These immunities fostered an environment in which foreign actors and private security firms could operate in an occupied country with minimal oversight and accountability. This setting was marked by civilian casualties, serious violations, and pervasive corruption and waste in contracting and reconstruction efforts. The danger was not only the harm caused but also that victims lacked effective local channels to seek justice against actors wielding force, weapons, money, and contracts, leaving them vulnerable and without redress.
Referring to the Iraqi experience in Gaza highlights the risks of replicating a model that has proven dangerous. When external actors gain substantial control over the population, resources, and public infrastructure, and are inherently exempt from judicial oversight, immunity transforms from a manageable safeguard into a privilege that enables unchecked abuse of power. This shift facilitates incidents of killings, injuries, violations, and corruption, while victims lack effective avenues for redress.
Any clause that grants immunity to the Board of Peace, its members, staff, or related entities, protecting them from accountability for violations or harm done to Palestinians, cannot invalidate victims’ rights to justice and reparation.