Jono Maryono
In the harrowing final moments of her young life on January 29, 2024, five-year-old Hind Rajab’s faint cries for her mother and desperately sought assistance echoed from a mangled vehicle, a testament to the terror she endured, trapped alongside the bodies of six deceased relatives. The tragedy that befell Hind, and subsequently the emergency responders dispatched to her aid, is now the subject of a new, comprehensive report by the legal campaign group Avaaz, which alleges a deliberate “double tap” attack by Israeli forces, constituting a grave violation of international combat law.
The report, exclusively shared with Al Jazeera, meticulously reconstructs the events of that fateful day, presenting substantial evidence that the killings contravened the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute. A “double tap” strike, as defined in military doctrine and international law discussions, involves two successive attacks on the same target, often with the intent of incapacitating or eliminating individuals who arrive to assist victims of the initial strike, including medics and civilians. Avaaz’s analysis, building upon prior investigations by Al Jazeera and other media organizations in partnership with the Hind Rajab Foundation, posits that the coordinated timing and approvals surrounding the ambulance mission strongly indicate a premeditated tactic aimed at targeting first responders.
A Chronology of Tragedy and Alleged War Crimes
The timeline of events leading to Hind Rajab’s death and the subsequent attack on the Red Crescent ambulance reveals a sequence that Avaaz argues points to deliberate targeting. After Hind was trapped in her vehicle in Gaza City, pleas for help were made. Clearance was eventually granted by the Israeli military for a Red Crescent ambulance to reach the young girl. However, as the marked vehicle, sirens blaring, raced towards its humanitarian mission, it came under fire from an Israeli tank, resulting in the deaths of two paramedics. It took an agonizing 12 days for the remains of all nine victims—Hind, her relatives, and the two paramedics—to be recovered.
The report meticulously details the period between the initial strike on the family car and the attack on the ambulance, noting that approximately three hours elapsed. This significant timeframe, Avaaz argues, provided Israeli forces with ample "situational awareness, communication, and command decision-making" opportunities. The legal campaign group asserts that the ambulance had secured explicit permission from COGAT, an Israeli military liaison body responsible for coordinating civilian affairs in the Palestinian territories, to undertake the rescue mission. This authorization, Avaaz contends, meant Israeli forces were fully aware of the ambulance’s identity, its intended route, and its mission to rescue Hind.
Forensic analysis, including satellite imagery and audio evidence compiled by the multidisciplinary research group Forensic Architecture, based at Goldsmiths, University of London, has reportedly identified the presence of several Israeli Merkava tanks in the vicinity of Hind’s car. Crucially, this analysis found no evidence of an exchange of fire between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters, contradicting initial Israeli claims that the extensive bullet holes found in the family’s car were a result of such a confrontation.
The "Double Tap" Tactic: A Pattern of Unlawful Attacks
Avaaz’s report underscores that the attack on the ambulance was not a warning shot. The nature of the assault, described as “lethal targeting,” suggests a deliberate intent to eliminate the emergency responders. International humanitarian law, including the Rome Statute, strictly prohibits direct attacks on medical personnel and facilities, as well as on civilians. The Geneva Conventions mandate the protection of medical transports and personnel engaged in humanitarian efforts.
Sarah Andrew, legal director of Avaaz, articulated the group’s conviction during an interview with Al Jazeera. “I have taken the investigations done by a number of independent journalistic outfits. I was really struck by the evidence at the end of the whole horrendous incident,” Andrew stated. Drawing a parallel to her own experience as a mother, she added, “In particular, the kind of weaponry that was used on the ambulance, the timing and the fact that no warning was given – it immediately triggered a question in my mind, and I am absolutely convinced that this is another case of double tap.”
Andrew further explained that while the typical timeframe for a second strike in a double-tap attack is often within five to 10 minutes, the prolonged interval in this case does not diminish the alleged severity of the act. Professor James Sweeney, an expert on human rights and conflict at the University of Lancaster, while noting that the extended delay might differ from the conventional understanding of a double-tap, firmly stated that it does not mitigate the unlawful nature of the attack on the ambulance. “In any case, it does not take away from the fact that these were war crimes,” he asserted.
Avaaz’s report meticulously details over 40 human rights violations, weaving them together to build a compelling case for a systematic double-tap attack. The group’s analysis suggests a chilling pattern: not only the killing of Palestinians, but the deliberate targeting of those who attempt to save them, sending a stark message that efforts to provide aid will be met with lethal force.
Broader Implications and Calls for Accountability
The implications of Avaaz’s findings are profound, resonating within the wider context of the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The report highlights that over 1,500 healthcare workers have been killed during the current hostilities, with many casualties occurring even after a purported ceasefire took effect in October. This raises grave concerns about the systematic undermining of humanitarian efforts and the intentional obstruction of life-saving assistance.
The Hind Rajab Foundation has publicly aligned with the findings, stating in a release, “The double tap arguments are consistent with our analysis as well. We are continuously preparing for new filings against responsible soldiers in various jurisdictions.” The Foundation has identified 24 individuals it deems responsible and has expressed its willingness to collaborate with Avaaz on a specific filing concerning the attack on the ambulance.
Avaaz is now urging the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate these allegations and bring those responsible for the deaths of Hind Rajab, her family, and the paramedics to justice. “It is something that has not had attention, and we would like to take this with [an independent legal] partner to the ICC,” Andrew stated, emphasizing the need for accountability for the perpetrators. “Justice is first of all bringing the light of attention into this crime and secondly seeing the persons responsible being accountable for their actions.”
The legal framework established by Avaaz aims to scrutinize not only the initial attack on Hind and her family but also the subsequent targeting of the ambulance crew. The report emphasizes that even in situations where an attacking force suspects misuse of a medical vehicle, international humanitarian law mandates warnings and an opportunity for compliance before any attack can be deemed lawful. To date, the Israeli military has not responded to Al Jazeera’s requests for comment regarding these allegations. The absence of a response leaves unanswered critical questions about the military’s actions, the justification for the tank fire on a clearly marked ambulance, and the broader implications for the protection of humanitarian workers in conflict zones. The pursuit of justice for Hind Rajab and the fallen paramedics underscores a critical global imperative: to ensure that those who dedicate their lives to saving others are not themselves targeted, and that violations of international law are met with rigorous investigation and accountability.
