First: Introduction of the Report
This report comes in the context of the widespread internal displacement witnessed in the Gaza Strip during the recent war, and the comprehensive destruction it caused to civilian infrastructure, including housing, schools, hospitals, and government buildings. This destruction forced hundreds of thousands of residents to seek refuge in public facilities that were compulsorily converted into collective shelters, primarily UNRWA schools, public schools, some hospitals, and official buildings that were never designed to accommodate such large numbers of displaced people.
With the cessation of military operations and the beginning of the post-ceasefire phase, local authorities and public institution administrations began efforts to resume the operation of these facilities, whether to restart educational processes or restore health and administrative services. During this phase, increasing cases were observed of displaced people being asked to leave these facilities or reduce their presence, either through direct notifications or informal measures that effectively pressured families to leave without providing suitable alternatives. This report aims to document and analyze these cases, assess their compliance with Palestinian and international legal obligations, and examine their humanitarian consequences in the absence of a clear national policy for managing internal displacement.
Second: Patterns of Eviction and Their Humanitarian Impact
In the post-ceasefire phase in Gaza, multiple patterns of eviction emerged within public facilities that had been converted into collective shelters during the war. Local authorities, alongside school and hospital administrations and some service entities, began taking measures to restore these facilities to their original functions—educational, health-related, or administrative. While these objectives ostensibly aim at restoring public services, the core human rights issue lies in the fact that these measures were often implemented without providing safe and dignified alternatives for the displaced, exposing thousands of families to immediate humanitarian risks and creating new waves of secondary displacement.
School and hospital administrations faced significant pressures to resume operations, especially given severe overcrowding and the presence of health or structural risks that impeded the continued delivery of services. However, the overlap between institutional needs and the duty to protect those already present created tension. Families were not provided with clear transitional plans, nor were the needs of vulnerable groups—including women, children, patients, and the elderly—taken into account. Some international organizations indirectly contributed to reducing the number of displaced people by redistributing beneficiaries or altering facility usage policies, effectively pushing families to leave without providing suitable alternatives.
Eviction mechanisms varied and were largely unorganized. In many cases, families received verbal, undocumented notifications from local staff, without any official document that could be contested or relied upon. In other cases, written notices or lists of names were posted on school or facility doors, targeting specific groups of displaced people, creating perceptions of discrimination and lack of transparency. Telephone calls were also used to demand evacuation within 24 to 72 hours—a short and unrealistic timeframe given the absence of transport or alternative destinations. The danger of these notifications increased when issued at night or under severe weather conditions, making relocation especially difficult for children and the elderly.
Field evidence shows that the absence of suitable alternatives was the defining feature of this phase. Families often moved to open land, unfinished buildings, or overcrowded camps lacking basic infrastructure for water, sanitation, and health care. In many cases, no alternative destination was provided at all, forcing families to rely on relatives or search independently for shelter in an unsafe environment, without any registration or official guidance system. This reality violates Palestinian legal obligations guaranteeing the right to adequate housing, public health laws mandating continuity of health care, and education laws prohibiting actions that deprive children of schooling.
The humanitarian impact of these evictions was severe on the most vulnerable groups. Women bore the greatest burden in managing forced relocation and securing the needs of children, patients, and the elderly in less stable environments, while risks of gender-based violence increased due to overcrowding or poorly organized spaces. Children suffered deep psychological distress from frequent movement and loss of security, continuous educational interruption, and exposure to hard labor, exploitation, or harassment in the absence of protective systems. Patients and the elderly faced disruption in medical care, difficulty accessing medical facilities, and worsening health conditions, particularly those with chronic illnesses requiring regular treatment. Evacuations under harsh weather or via damaged routes further increased risks to health and survival during relocation.
These patterns of eviction—characterized by lack of alternatives, transparency, and protection—highlight a significant gap between field reality and the legal obligations imposed by Palestinian law and international standards. They underscore the urgent need for a clear national policy for managing internal displacement that ensures the protection and dignity of displaced persons and prevents repeated waves of secondary displacement, which exacerbate the suffering of families who have lost everything.
Third: Legal Framework for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons – Analytical Review in Light of Field Facts
Internal displacement in the Gaza Strip represents one of the most critical humanitarian consequences of the war, particularly when linked to forced or unorganized evacuation from public facilities converted into collective shelters. Field investigations documented cases—such as a displaced family with children and a sick grandmother being asked to leave a college used as shelter without alternative accommodation, and a kidney patient evacuated from near a hospital without ensuring continuity of treatment—that reveal a serious gap between reality and the legal obligations imposed by Palestinian law and international law on entities responsible for protecting internally displaced persons. Below is a dual legal analysis encompassing national and international frameworks, directly applied to documented real-life cases.
Palestinian Legal Framework:
Palestinian law, at constitutional and legislative levels, establishes a clear system for protecting fundamental rights, including those of internally displaced persons. Although Palestine lacks a specific law on internal displacement, the amended 2003 Palestinian Basic Law and sectoral laws (health, education, child rights) impose direct obligations on local authorities and public institutions to protect displaced persons and prevent exposing them to additional risks.
Right to Human Dignity:
The Basic Law (amended) states in Article 2 that “Human dignity is supreme,” in Article 9 that Palestinians are equal in rights and duties, and in Article 10 that the state commits to fundamental rights and freedoms in accordance with international conventions. For example, forcing Samer’s family, including children and a sick grandmother, to move to open land without tents or services constitutes a direct violation of human dignity, contradicting the constitutional obligation to protect vulnerable groups.
Right to Adequate Housing:
While there is no housing law specific to displaced persons, the Basic Law guarantees a “decent standard of living,” which includes adequate housing. The Palestinian judiciary has reinforced housing protection as a fundamental right. Therefore, eviction without providing an alternative, as happened with Samer’s and Fouad’s families, constitutes a violation of the right to adequate housing, making the evicting authority legally accountable.
Right to Health:
Public health law obliges authorities to ensure continuity of health care, especially for those needing regular treatment. In Fouad Al-Attar’s case, who requires dialysis every three days, eviction without ensuring treatment continuity and transportation disrupted dialysis sessions, violating the law’s obligation to protect patients from risk.
Right to Education:
Education law prohibits any action that deprives children of schooling. Evicting schools used as shelters without transitional plans or alternatives caused educational disruption, creating a continuous cycle of deprivation, violating legal obligations to protect children’s right to education.
Child Protection:
The Palestinian Child Law mandates protection from danger, neglect, and exploitation, requiring state measures to ensure safety. Field facts—such as children being forced to relocate under harsh conditions, perform hard labor, or lose protection—show clear violations of these obligations.
International Legal Framework:
International humanitarian law (IHL), international human rights law (IHRL), and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement provide the most comprehensive framework for protecting internally displaced persons and are key references for evaluating the legality of post-ceasefire evictions.
International Humanitarian Law – Protection of Civilians and Prohibition of Forced Transfer:
IHL prohibits forced transfer of civilians except in cases of absolute necessity and requires appropriate conditions for shelter, health, and safety.
The Fourth Geneva Convention (Article 49) prohibits forced displacement except under “absolute military necessity.”
Protocol I (Article 51) prohibits terrorizing civilians or forcing displacement.
Protocol II (Article 17) repeats the same prohibition in non-international conflicts.
In light of documented cases, asking families to leave without alternatives, military necessity, or protection equates to prohibited forced transfer.
Protection of Civilian Objects:
The Fourth Geneva Convention (Article 18) protects civilian hospitals, and Protocol I (Articles 52–53) protects schools and public facilities. Using schools in ways that cause displacement or evacuating patients without treatment continuity violates civilian object protection.
Rome Statute – Criminal Description of Forced Transfer:
Forced transfer constitutes a crime against humanity if widespread or systematic (Article 7).
It constitutes a war crime if done without compelling military necessity (Article 8).
Fouad Al-Attar’s case, where eviction disrupted treatment and endangered life, qualifies as forced transfer rising to a severe violation.
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998):
Principle 6 prohibits arbitrary displacement.
Principle 7 mandates adequate shelter, water, food, and health care.
Principle 7 also emphasizes family unity and procedural guarantees prior to eviction.
Absence of such guarantees in documented cases renders the evictions arbitrary under international standards.
International Human Rights Law:
State obligations persist even in emergencies. Right to adequate housing (ICCPR Article 11), right to health (Article 12), and right to education (Article 13) are directly violated by eviction without alternative housing or health care guarantees.
Recommendations for Local Authorities:
Local authorities are directly responsible for managing public facilities post-ceasefire and must base decisions on clear human rights standards.
Sixth: Findings and Recommendations:
Field documentation, including eviction of Samer’s family from the college in Deir al-Balah without alternative accommodation, and eviction of Fouad Al-Attar from near the hospital despite dialysis needs, shows a complex picture of post-ceasefire evictions in Gaza. These evictions occurred in the absence of a national internal displacement management policy, suitable alternatives, or procedural guarantees, causing new waves of secondary displacement and deterioration in the health, education, and social conditions of the most vulnerable.
Continuing unplanned evictions will exacerbate instability, increase family movement between shelters, and elevate health risks, particularly in winter. Absence of alternatives will erode institutional capacity to protect vulnerable groups, prolong educational deprivation, and disrupt health care, as in Fouad’s interrupted dialysis.
Adopting a phased policy for organized shelter—setting unified evacuation standards, providing suitable alternatives, and enhancing coordination with international organizations—can mitigate humanitarian impact and restore some stability. International support for reconstruction and rehabilitation, and separation of shelter and service functions, can enable the development of a permanent national framework for internal displacement management.
Practical and Legal Recommendations:
Official Evacuation Protocol:
Written or documented verbal notice with at least 72-hour timeframe.
Clear, pre-announced alternative destinations.
Provision of suitable transport, especially for families with patients or elderly.
Prioritize vulnerable groups: women, children, patients, elderly, disabled.
Ban night-time or hazardous weather evacuations except in imminent danger, with immediate medical and relief support.
Specialized Internal Displacement Unit:
Register displaced persons, assess needs, guide them to suitable shelters, coordinate with international organizations, and prevent secondary displacement, to avoid cases like Samer’s family being left without direction or alternatives.
Recommendations for International and Humanitarian Organizations:
Support existing shelters with emergency materials, improved water and sanitation, psychosocial services, and assistance for families with chronic patients, like Fouad.
Link humanitarian support to protection standards, requiring local partners to avoid evictions without alternatives and comply with international displacement standards.
Recommendations for Palestinian Human Rights Institutions:
Systematic documentation of evictions, building a database including: date, location, ordering authority, affected individuals, available alternatives, and health and social outcomes.
Use international accountability mechanisms, including parallel reporting and complaints to special rapporteurs.
Recommendations for Palestinian Legislators and Legal Authorities:
Develop a legal framework specifically for internal displacement, based on the Guiding Principles, IHL, and IHRL.
Document violations rising to the level of forced transfer.
Seventh: Conclusion
Field facts documented by the report show that post-ceasefire evictions in Gaza occurred in a fragile context marked by lack of alternatives, poor planning, and absence of essential humanitarian guarantees. This led to new waves of secondary displacement, deterioration of families’ living conditions, interruption of health care, deprivation of children’s education, and increased risks for women and the elderly. Real cases reveal a clear gap between reality and Palestinian and international legal obligations to protect displaced persons and ensure their dignity.
The report concludes that eviction, when carried out without safe and dignified alternatives, clear procedures, and consideration for vulnerable groups, transforms from an administrative step into an act with severe humanitarian and legal consequences, undermining basic rights guaranteed by the Palestinian Basic Law and international law. Protecting internally displaced persons requires actual commitment to clear evacuation standards, provision of suitable alternatives (such as caravans, sturdy tents, sanitation, services and facilities within camps, heating equipment, etc.), and enhanced institutional coordination, ensuring that the post-war phase becomes a beginning for restoring minimum stability and dignity, not a continuation of displacement suffering.
