Peticion de Apoyo a 7 de octubre
POR LA MEMORIA DEL 7 DE OCTUBRE, CONTRA EL ODIO Y EL TERRORISMO
Petición dirigida al Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas, António Guterres. A tres años de los ataques terroristas del 7 de octubre de 2023 perpetrados por Hamas, alzamos nuestra voz para preservar la memoria y la dignidad de las víctimas y sobrevivientes, enfrentar el antisemitismo y rechazar toda forma de negación, banalización o justificación de las atrocidades cometidas aquel día.
PETICIÓN POR LA MEMORIA DEL 7 DE OCTUBRE, CONTRA EL ODIO Y EL TERRORISMO
Petición al Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas, António Guterres
Nosotros, miembros de comunidades latinoamericanas unidos por el compromiso de preservar la memoria y la dignidad de las víctimas y sobrevivientes de los ataques del 7 de octubre de 2023, elevamos esta petición al Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas.
Ese fatídico 7 de octubre, Hamas y otros grupos terroristas palestinos llevaron a cabo un brutal ataque contra Israel. Civiles inocentes fueron asesinados, torturados y víctimas de actos de violencia sexual. Entre las víctimas había mujeres, niños, bebés y adultos mayores. Ese mismo día, 251 personas fueron secuestradas y llevadas como rehenes a Gaza. Muchos permanecieron allí durante más de dos años. Solo después de 843 días fue recuperado y devuelto a Israel el último rehén que permanecía en Gaza. Muchos de los secuestrados, lamentablemente, no regresaron con vida.
Tres años después, frente a la persistencia del antisemitismo y de narrativas que niegan, banalizan o buscan justificar la violencia cometida por Hamas, creemos que recordar no es suficiente. La memoria exige también responsabilidad y acción.
Por ello, solicitamos al Secretario General que, antes de concluir su mandato:
- condene de manera inequívoca el terrorismo de Hamas y la toma de rehenes, sin justificaciones ni relativizaciones;
- garantice que, en el marco de las Naciones Unidas, se otorguen de manera efectiva la prioridad, los espacios, la atención y los recursos necesarios para combatir el antisemitismo, la negación y banalización de los ataques del 7 de octubre y toda forma de incitación al odio contra el pueblo judío;
- vele para que los órganos y mecanismos de las Naciones Unidas actúen conforme a los principios de imparcialidad, universalidad y no selectividad, y aseguren que sus espacios no sean utilizados para legitimar discursos de odio, incitación o deshumanización dirigidos contra el Estado de Israel;
- brinde los espacios institucionales y simbólicos correspondientes para preservar y amplificar las voces de las víctimas y sobrevivientes del 7 de octubre, de modo que sus historias formen parte de la memoria colectiva internacional.
Al firmar esta petición, reafirmamos nuestro compromiso con la memoria de quienes fueron asesinados, con quienes sobrevivieron y continúan recuperándose de heridas visibles e invisibles, y con las familias que cargan hasta hoy con las consecuencias del 7 de octubre.
Reafirmamos también nuestro compromiso con el derecho del Estado de Israel a existir, con el derecho del pueblo judío a vivir con seguridad y autodeterminación, y con el derecho de todas las personas de la región a vivir en paz, seguridad y dignidad.
Alzamos nuestra voz por quienes ya no pueden hacerlo.
Recordar es también actuar.
Una iniciativa de
PETICIÓN POR LA MEMORIA DEL 7 DE OCTUBRE, CONTRA EL ODIO Y EL TERRORISMO
Kidnapped: Hostage-Taking as a Form of Torture
“We were brutally kidnapped from our house. Our girls saw things
that kids that age, or any age, should not see. You feel like you want
to pinch yourself and wake up from this movie. We just slept, cried.
Every day that passed was an endless eternity.”
- Danielle Aloni
Executive Summary
On October 7, 2023, Hamas and its related militias invaded southern Israel and forcibly abducted 247 men, women, and children. Prior to that attack, 4 hostages were already being held in Gaza. Over 2 years later, all of the hostages have come home, and a reckoning is now due.
This report is based on the testimony of released hostages and the health care professionals who treat them. It analyzes the clear and absolute prohibition on torture under international law, and integrates the findings of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, whose 2025 report identified a clear pattern of physical and psychological abuse suffered by hostages during captivity, as well as post-traumatic harm after their release.
We reveal here that 88 percent of the hostages were civilians. Among them, 23 hostages were aged 12 or younger at the time of their abduction, and 34 were aged 60 or older. Fifty percent of the hostages were non-Israeli or held dual or multiple citizenships, including citizens of at least 24 different countries.
The hostages were held in harsh, degrading, and inhumane conditions and were denied medical care, food, access to personal hygiene, and natural light. Threats of execution, prolonged isolation, sexual assault, and abuse were routine experiences in captivity. 68% of the hostages held for over 200 days were forced to participate in propaganda videos. So far, 12 released hostages have described being sexually assaulted in captivity, including women and men. 33 hostages were executed by their captors.
At least 78 released hostages showed signs of starvation, acute malnutrition, and severe muscle wasting, having received as little as a single piece of bread each day, even as their captors ate full meals. Most hostages faced inadequate hygiene, physical violence, and extended periods of immobility during captivity. Psychological assessments further reveal acute dissociation, emotional numbing, and severe mental withdrawal.
“For 491 days, I was kept mostly underground in Hamas terror tunnels, chained, starved, beaten, and humiliated.” - Eli Sharabi
This report calls upon United Nations mechanisms, State Parties to the Convention Against Torture, and international accountability bodies to address the October 7 attacks and the hostage-taking as conduct that constitutes torture, and recognize former hostages and their families as victims of torture. Torture is absolutely prohibited under international law. It cannot be justified or contextualized. Hostage-taking is not merely arbitrary detention. It is the deliberate weaponization of human suffering to bend political will.
The Jerusalem Institute of Justice urges States and international bodies to reject any framing of the hostage-taking of Israelis as a legitimate military tactic or political bargaining tool. Finally, we call for the perpetrators and co-conspirators to be held accountable through criminal trials, civil litigation, and the application of universal jurisdiction.
Justice Before Diplomacy - Indict the IRGC
Don't Let the Iranian Revolutionary
Guard Corps (IRGC) Walk Free
The US and Iran are moving toward a peace deal. A political ceasefire cannot become a free pass for war crimes, including the assassination of 40,000 civilian protestors. Add your name and demand that the men who launched thousands of missiles at civilians face arrest, not amnesty.
PETITION: Justice Before Diplomacy. Indict the IRGC.
TO: The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and European Justice Ministries
A US-Iran peace deal cannot mean amnesty for war crimes.
In January 2026, the Iranian regime assassinated 40,000 civilian protestors. Between February and April 2026, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched an unprecedented campaign of terror, firing over 2,300 ballistic missiles and 5,350 drones at civilian centers across Israel and the broader Middle East.
This devastation was not collateral damage. It was the strategic objective. The IRGC deliberately used illegal cluster bombs in densely populated cities to maximize civilian casualties, a severe violation of international law.
We cannot allow the architects of this massacre to live, travel, and bank freely in the West under the cover of a new diplomatic arrangement. The ICC and European prosecutors have the legal jurisdiction to act right now.
We, the undersigned, demand the immediate issuance of binding international arrest warrants for the IRGC command structure and Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.
Joint kinetic operation - USA & Israel
Legal Justification for Preemptive Self-Defense: The February 28, 2026, Joint Operation
This position paper examines the February 28, 2026, joint kinetic operation conducted by Israel and the United States. It sets out the legal case for treating the operation as a lawful exercise of preemptive self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter in response to an imminent threat posed by Iran. Grounded in the Caroline test, ICJ jurisprudence, and relevant principles of international law, the paper argues that the operation was a measure of last resort, not an act of aggression
Hamas Charter 1988 vs 2017: Why Rhetoric Has Never Meant Reform
Originally published 2017 | Updated January 2026
For many years, Hamas' Charter of 1988 has undermined their legitimacy within the international community. Many advocates in favor of Palestinian independence have found themselves unable to endorse the violence, antisemitism, and calls for genocide contained within the document.
In 2017, Hamas released a revised document titled "General Principles and Policies" in an attempt to rebrand their public image. It served as an affirmation of their ideologies and positions on issues relating to Israel.
Nearly a decade later, and in the shadow of the October 7 massacre, this effort at rebranding can be assessed with greater clarity. From a legal perspective, the revised document did not constitute ideological reform. It was a strategic exercise in linguistic moderation that left Hamas' core objectives intact and legally indefensible.
The Contradiction at the Heart of Hamas' Position
The 2017 document provides insight into Hamas' willingness, or lack thereof, to coexist with an Israeli state:
"Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus." [i]
This is an oxymoron of a policy, requiring intellectual gymnastics to understand both its consistency and logic. Acceptance of a state along the pre-1967 armistice lines denotes a willingness or reluctant acceptance to live alongside an Israeli state, rather than a "full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea." The two positions are incompatible.
Their so-called "acceptance" of a state is essentially an acceptance of a starting point from which to appropriate modern-day Israel. This was admitted by senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar in 2011, who referred to the acceptance of the pre-1967 lines as "just a phase" until Hamas has a chance to "regain the land, even if we [Hamas] have to do so inch by inch." [ii]
Following this logic, Brazil could hypothetically accept a state in Rio de Janeiro yet maintain the entire territorial integrity of modern-day Brazil. Or, more appropriately, the Islamic State could accept a state in Raqqa, Syria, yet maintain its ambitions to establish a Caliphate from Spain to Afghanistan.
Under international law, recognition is not symbolic. It is a prerequisite for durable sovereignty, stable borders, and peaceful relations between states. Hamas' position reduces the concept of statehood to a tactical waypoint rather than a terminal political solution. From a legal standpoint, such a posture fails the minimum threshold of good faith required for participation in any peace process.
Antisemitism in the 1988 Hamas Charter
The 1988 Charter contains conspiratorial antisemitic accusations of Jewish and Zionist domination of global institutions, as well as insinuations about the malevolence of Jewish people:
"Writers, intellectuals, media people, orators, educators and teachers, and all the various sectors in the Arab and Islamic world - all of them are called upon to perform their role, and to fulfil their duty, because of the ferocity of the Zionist offensive and the Zionist influence in many countries exercised through financial and media control, as well as the consequences that all this lead to in the greater part of the world." [iii]
"The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying." [iv]
"Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people. "May the cowards never sleep." [v]
"The Jews made no exception for women or children. Their policy of striking fear in the heart is meant for all. They attack people where their breadwinning is concerned, extorting their money and threatening their honour." [vi]
Calls for Violence and Genocide in the Original Charter
The original 1988 Charter did not just draw attention to the supposed true aspirations of world Jewry. It openly advocated for violence and genocide against Jewish people:
"We should not forget to remind every Moslem that when the Jews conquered the Holy City in 1967, they stood on the threshold of the Aqsa Mosque and proclaimed that "Mohammed is dead, and his descendants are all women." [vii]
However, the original 1988 Charter did not just draw attention to the supposed true aspirations of world Jewry. Rather, they openly advocated for violence and genocide against Jewish people:
"In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised" [viii]
"Arab and Islamic Peoples should augment by further steps on their part; Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should also do the same, since all of these are the best-equipped for the future role in the fight with the warmongering Jews" [ix]
"Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" [x]
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem) [xi]
The 2017 Document: Antisemitism by Substitution
The revised document is careful to adopt a more palatable tone regarding Jewish people:
"Hamas affirms that its conflict is with the Zionist project not with the Jews because of their religion. Hamas does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine. Yet, it is the Zionists who constantly identify Judaism and the Jews with their own colonial project and illegal entity." [xii]
The term "Jews" has been euphemistically replaced with the term "Zionists." This semantic shift does not withstand legal scrutiny.
When "Zionists" are portrayed as a monolithic global force, accused of controlling international institutions, denied historical or cultural ties to the land, and stripped of the right to national self-determination, the distinction collapses. Contemporary international standards, including those adopted by the U.S. State Department, the EU, and numerous international bodies, recognize that denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination or the legitimacy of Israel's existence constitutes modern antisemitism.
The revised language does not abandon antisemitic tropes; it repackages them in terms more palatable to diplomatic audiences.
The Muslim Brotherhood Connection
The revised document presents a major shift in Hamas' public acknowledgement of its ideological and political affiliation. It makes no mention of The Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist movement designated as a terrorist organization in Russia, Egypt, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. This is despite the fact that Hamas emerged as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and is referenced in the original 1988 Charter:
"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine. Moslem Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times." [xv]
Although Hamas has not commented on the Brotherhood's omission from its new document, it is likely an attempt to garner favor with regional players such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia who have designated the group as a terrorist organization.
Yet omission is not disavowal. There is no evidence of ideological severance, operational distancing, or repudiation of the Brotherhood's core worldview. The silence reflects a tactical calculation aimed at diplomatic maneuvering rather than genuine transformation.
The Persistence of Violent Doctrine
Crucially, Hamas has never renounced violence against civilians. The 2017 document does not repudiate the 1988 Charter's endorsement of armed struggle, nor does it disavow the religious framing of violence as an obligation.
This is not merely a rhetorical omission. In international humanitarian law, intent matters, but conduct matters more. The systematic targeting of civilians, hostage-taking, sexual violence, and indiscriminate attacks are prohibited per se, regardless of political grievance. These acts constitute war crimes and, in certain contexts, crimes against humanity.
The events of October 7, 2023, eliminated any residual ambiguity about Hamas' operational doctrine. They demonstrated continuity, not rupture, between ideology and action.
Hamas Leaders Confirm: The Charter Remains
For those who viewed the revised document as a step in the right direction, senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar clarified in May 2017 that its revised document did not contradict its founding Charter of 1988:
"The pledge Hamas made before God was to liberate all of Palestine…The Charter is the core of [Hamas’] position and the mechanism of this position is the document…We have reaffirmed the unchanging constant principles that we do not recognize Israel; we do not recognize the land occupied in 1948 as belonging to Israel and we do not recognize that the people who came here (Jews) own this land." [xvii]
Law, Not Language, Determines Legitimacy
Under international law, legitimacy is not conferred by revised phrasing or selective omissions. It is earned through demonstrable compliance with legal norms: recognition of existing states, renunciation of violence against civilians, adherence to humanitarian law, and acceptance of peaceful dispute resolution.
Hamas has met none of these criteria.
The lesson of the past decade is clear: rhetoric cannot substitute for responsibility. Hamas' revised language did not signal ideological evolution; it signaled strategic adaptation.
International law is not deceived by euphemism. It judges actors by their objectives, conduct, and adherence to binding norms. On all three counts, Hamas remains in fundamental violation of the principles that govern lawful political participation and the protection of human rights.
Rebranding does not erase responsibility. And moderation in words, when contradicted by violence in practice, carries no legal weight.
The Jerusalem Institute of Justice provides free legal aid to survivors of terrorism, human trafficking, and discrimination. We fight against antisemitism around the world and stand up for Israel on the world stage by being the only pro-Israel non-profit with ECOSOC status at the United Nations. Your donations can help make a difference against antisemitism as well as provide free legal aid to those who need it most in Israel.
References
- [i] Hamas 2017, A Document of General Principles & Policies, May 1, viewed 11 May 2017, http://hamas.ps/en/post/678/
- [ii] Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) 2011, ‘Hamas Leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar Slams PA President for “Aimless Kangaroo-Like” Political Gymnastics and Says: We Will Not Relinquish Any Piece of Palestinian Land’ (Transcript of Excerpts from Television Interview with Hamas Leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar on Dream 1 TV), July 20, viewed 11 May 2017, https://www.memri.org/tv/hamas-leader-mahmoud-al-zahhar-slams-pa-president-abbas-aimless-kangaroo-political-gymnastics-and/transcript
- [iii] Hamas 1988, ‘The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement’, Yale Law School Lillian Goldman Library: The Avalon Project, viewed 11 May 2017, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
- [iv] ibid
- [v] ibid
- [vi] ibid
- [vii] ibid
- [viii] ibid
- [ix] ibid
- [x] ibid
- [xi] ibid
- [xii] Hamas 1988, op. cit.
- [xiii] U.S. Department of State 2017, ‘Defining Anti-Semitism’, January 20, viewed 14 May 2017, https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm
- [xiv] Abu-Amr, Z. 1994, Islamic Fundamentalism in the West Bank and Gaza: Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad, India University Press, United States of America, p. 16
- [xv] Hamas 1988, op. cit.
- [xvi] Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) 2010, ‘Morsi in 2010: No to Negotiations with the Blood-Sucking Warmongering “Descendants of Apes and Pigs”; Calls to Boycott U.S. Products’ (Transcript of Excerpts from Archival Interviews with Mohammed Morsi, September 23, viewed 14 May 2017, https://www.memri.org/tv/morsi-2010-no-negotiations-blood-sucking-warmongering-descendants-apes-and-pigs-calls-boycott-us/transcript
- [xvii] Jerusalem Post 2017, ‘Hamas Says New Document ‘Not a Substitute for Founding Charter’, May 11, viewed 14 May 2017
Hamas Charter 1988 vs 2017: Why Rhetoric Has Never Meant Reform
Originally published 2017 | Updated January 2026
For many years, Hamas' Charter of 1988 has undermined their legitimacy within the international community. Many advocates in favor of Palestinian independence have found themselves unable to endorse the violence, antisemitism, and calls for genocide contained within the document.
In 2017, Hamas released a revised document titled "General Principles and Policies" in an attempt to rebrand their public image. It served as an affirmation of their ideologies and positions on issues relating to Israel.
Nearly a decade later, and in the shadow of the October 7 massacre, this effort at rebranding can be assessed with greater clarity. From a legal perspective, the revised document did not constitute ideological reform. It was a strategic exercise in linguistic moderation that left Hamas' core objectives intact and legally indefensible.
The Contradiction at the Heart of Hamas' Position
The 2017 document provides insight into Hamas' willingness, or lack thereof, to coexist with an Israeli state:
"Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus." [i]
This is an oxymoron of a policy, requiring intellectual gymnastics to understand both its consistency and logic. Acceptance of a state along the pre-1967 armistice lines denotes a willingness or reluctant acceptance to live alongside an Israeli state, rather than a "full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea." The two positions are incompatible.
Their so-called "acceptance" of a state is essentially an acceptance of a starting point from which to appropriate modern-day Israel. This was admitted by senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar in 2011, who referred to the acceptance of the pre-1967 lines as "just a phase" until Hamas has a chance to "regain the land, even if we [Hamas] have to do so inch by inch." [ii]
Following this logic, Brazil could hypothetically accept a state in Rio de Janeiro yet maintain the entire territorial integrity of modern-day Brazil. Or, more appropriately, the Islamic State could accept a state in Raqqa, Syria, yet maintain its ambitions to establish a Caliphate from Spain to Afghanistan.
Under international law, recognition is not symbolic. It is a prerequisite for durable sovereignty, stable borders, and peaceful relations between states. Hamas' position reduces the concept of statehood to a tactical waypoint rather than a terminal political solution. From a legal standpoint, such a posture fails the minimum threshold of good faith required for participation in any peace process.
Antisemitism in the 1988 Hamas Charter
The 1988 Charter contains conspiratorial antisemitic accusations of Jewish and Zionist domination of global institutions, as well as insinuations about the malevolence of Jewish people:
"Writers, intellectuals, media people, orators, educators and teachers, and all the various sectors in the Arab and Islamic world - all of them are called upon to perform their role, and to fulfil their duty, because of the ferocity of the Zionist offensive and the Zionist influence in many countries exercised through financial and media control, as well as the consequences that all this lead to in the greater part of the world." [iii]
"The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying." [iv]
"Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people. "May the cowards never sleep." [v]
"The Jews made no exception for women or children. Their policy of striking fear in the heart is meant for all. They attack people where their breadwinning is concerned, extorting their money and threatening their honour." [vi]
Calls for Violence and Genocide in the Original Charter
The original 1988 Charter did not just draw attention to the supposed true aspirations of world Jewry. It openly advocated for violence and genocide against Jewish people:
"We should not forget to remind every Moslem that when the Jews conquered the Holy City in 1967, they stood on the threshold of the Aqsa Mosque and proclaimed that "Mohammed is dead, and his descendants are all women." [vii]
However, the original 1988 Charter did not just draw attention to the supposed true aspirations of world Jewry. Rather, they openly advocated for violence and genocide against Jewish people:
"In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised" [viii]
"Arab and Islamic Peoples should augment by further steps on their part; Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should also do the same, since all of these are the best-equipped for the future role in the fight with the warmongering Jews" [ix]
"Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" [x]
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem) [xi]
The 2017 Document: Antisemitism by Substitution
The revised document is careful to adopt a more palatable tone regarding Jewish people:
"Hamas affirms that its conflict is with the Zionist project not with the Jews because of their religion. Hamas does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine. Yet, it is the Zionists who constantly identify Judaism and the Jews with their own colonial project and illegal entity." [xii]
The term "Jews" has been euphemistically replaced with the term "Zionists." This semantic shift does not withstand legal scrutiny.
When "Zionists" are portrayed as a monolithic global force, accused of controlling international institutions, denied historical or cultural ties to the land, and stripped of the right to national self-determination, the distinction collapses. Contemporary international standards, including those adopted by the U.S. State Department, the EU, and numerous international bodies, recognize that denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination or the legitimacy of Israel's existence constitutes modern antisemitism.
The revised language does not abandon antisemitic tropes; it repackages them in terms more palatable to diplomatic audiences.
The Muslim Brotherhood Connection
The revised document presents a major shift in Hamas' public acknowledgement of its ideological and political affiliation. It makes no mention of The Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist movement designated as a terrorist organization in Russia, Egypt, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. This is despite the fact that Hamas emerged as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and is referenced in the original 1988 Charter:
"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine. Moslem Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times." [xv]
Although Hamas has not commented on the Brotherhood's omission from its new document, it is likely an attempt to garner favor with regional players such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia who have designated the group as a terrorist organization.
Yet omission is not disavowal. There is no evidence of ideological severance, operational distancing, or repudiation of the Brotherhood's core worldview. The silence reflects a tactical calculation aimed at diplomatic maneuvering rather than genuine transformation.
The Persistence of Violent Doctrine
Crucially, Hamas has never renounced violence against civilians. The 2017 document does not repudiate the 1988 Charter's endorsement of armed struggle, nor does it disavow the religious framing of violence as an obligation.
This is not merely a rhetorical omission. In international humanitarian law, intent matters, but conduct matters more. The systematic targeting of civilians, hostage-taking, sexual violence, and indiscriminate attacks are prohibited per se, regardless of political grievance. These acts constitute war crimes and, in certain contexts, crimes against humanity.
The events of October 7, 2023, eliminated any residual ambiguity about Hamas' operational doctrine. They demonstrated continuity, not rupture, between ideology and action.
Hamas Leaders Confirm: The Charter Remains
For those who viewed the revised document as a step in the right direction, senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar clarified in May 2017 that its revised document did not contradict its founding Charter of 1988:
"The pledge Hamas made before God was to liberate all of Palestine…The Charter is the core of [Hamas’] position and the mechanism of this position is the document…We have reaffirmed the unchanging constant principles that we do not recognize Israel; we do not recognize the land occupied in 1948 as belonging to Israel and we do not recognize that the people who came here (Jews) own this land." [xvii]
Law, Not Language, Determines Legitimacy
Under international law, legitimacy is not conferred by revised phrasing or selective omissions. It is earned through demonstrable compliance with legal norms: recognition of existing states, renunciation of violence against civilians, adherence to humanitarian law, and acceptance of peaceful dispute resolution.
Hamas has met none of these criteria.
The lesson of the past decade is clear: rhetoric cannot substitute for responsibility. Hamas' revised language did not signal ideological evolution; it signaled strategic adaptation.
International law is not deceived by euphemism. It judges actors by their objectives, conduct, and adherence to binding norms. On all three counts, Hamas remains in fundamental violation of the principles that govern lawful political participation and the protection of human rights.
Rebranding does not erase responsibility. And moderation in words, when contradicted by violence in practice, carries no legal weight.
The Jerusalem Institute of Justice provides free legal aid to survivors of terrorism, human trafficking, and discrimination. We fight against antisemitism around the world and stand up for Israel on the world stage by being the only pro-Israel non-profit with ECOSOC status at the United Nations. Your donations can help make a difference against antisemitism as well as provide free legal aid to those who need it most in Israel.
References
- [i] Hamas 2017, A Document of General Principles & Policies, May 1, viewed 11 May 2017, http://hamas.ps/en/post/678/
- [ii] Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) 2011, ‘Hamas Leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar Slams PA President for “Aimless Kangaroo-Like” Political Gymnastics and Says: We Will Not Relinquish Any Piece of Palestinian Land’ (Transcript of Excerpts from Television Interview with Hamas Leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar on Dream 1 TV), July 20, viewed 11 May 2017, https://www.memri.org/tv/hamas-leader-mahmoud-al-zahhar-slams-pa-president-abbas-aimless-kangaroo-political-gymnastics-and/transcript
- [iii] Hamas 1988, ‘The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement’, Yale Law School Lillian Goldman Library: The Avalon Project, viewed 11 May 2017, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
- [iv] ibid
- [v] ibid
- [vi] ibid
- [vii] ibid
- [viii] ibid
- [ix] ibid
- [x] ibid
- [xi] ibid
- [xii] Hamas 1988, op. cit.
- [xiii] U.S. Department of State 2017, ‘Defining Anti-Semitism’, January 20, viewed 14 May 2017, https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm
- [xiv] Abu-Amr, Z. 1994, Islamic Fundamentalism in the West Bank and Gaza: Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad, India University Press, United States of America, p. 16
- [xv] Hamas 1988, op. cit.
- [xvi] Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) 2010, ‘Morsi in 2010: No to Negotiations with the Blood-Sucking Warmongering “Descendants of Apes and Pigs”; Calls to Boycott U.S. Products’ (Transcript of Excerpts from Archival Interviews with Mohammed Morsi, September 23, viewed 14 May 2017, https://www.memri.org/tv/morsi-2010-no-negotiations-blood-sucking-warmongering-descendants-apes-and-pigs-calls-boycott-us/transcript
- [xvii] Jerusalem Post 2017, ‘Hamas Says New Document ‘Not a Substitute for Founding Charter’, May 11, viewed 14 May 2017
Gaza After Hamas
GAZA AFTER HAMAS:
THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY`S CAPACITY TO GOVERN
Despite the Palestinian Authority’s historical support for armed struggle against Israel, the PA’s steadily eroding legitimacy among the Palestinian public, and deep Israeli distrust, alongside the absence of a stable and strong alternative leadership and the PA’s response to the October 7 massacre, international discourse around the potential involvement of the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip is growing. Some in the international community consider the PA the most legitimate potential actor to govern Gaza because the PA is the internationally recognized governing body of the Palestinian people through the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Oslo Accords. In their view, the PA is also the only Palestinian institution with pre-established ministries, security structures, and donor-backed administrative capacity to run the Strip effectively.
However, to be accepted on an international level (specifically according to the terms of the United States and Trump) as a candidate for the governance of the Gaza Strip, it must undergo verifiable reform on three main fronts: the elimination of the “Pay-for-Slay” fund, the eradication of indoctrinatory educational systems, and the establishment of stable government structures and cooperative leadership.
A Clean Slate Isn’t Charity, It’s Public Policy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YclR4ZvD9Ng
There’s a moment in every rehabilitation story that doesn’t make it into the inspirational quotes. It’s not the first day sober, or the first job interview, or even the first night of safe sleep. It’s the moment a person realizes the past hasn’t just hurt them, it’s still billing them.
For one woman, a survivor of the sex trade, that bill came in the form of 77 fines totaling about 100,000 shekels. Not a “mistake,” not a single misstep—an accumulated record of survival under conditions most of us are lucky never to face. A teenager subjected to severe sexual assault. A descent into prostitution, drug dependence, and life on the street. And then, against the odds, a decision to climb out.
She did what we demand people do when we speak about “responsibility.” She sought help. With the support of a mobile clinic operated through the Haifa Health Bureau, she got clean. She started looking for work. She began the slow, grinding work of rebuilding a life.
And then she hit a wall made of paperwork.
A six-figure debt doesn’t just punish. It paralyzes. It restricts movement, employment, stability—everything rehabilitation requires. It becomes an anchor disguised as accountability: a millstone around the neck of someone trying to swim to shore.
That is why the decision by Israel’s Enforcement and Collection Authority to erase the full amount is more than a compassionate gesture. It’s a statement—rare, and therefore revealing—about what real rehabilitation actually needs.
Attorney Tamar Stachel-Devor of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, which provides free legal aid to marginalized populations, described the case as exceptional. It was referred to JIJ's free legal aid department by social worker Noga Shiloh from the mobile clinic, and it succeeded because the system was persuaded to see what the numbers usually hide: this wasn’t a “serial offender.” This was a person who had been failed repeatedly—and was still trying.
We should pause on that word: exceptional.
Why should it be exceptional to recognize that fines piled on vulnerable people often function less like deterrence and more like lifelong barriers? Why should the state need a rare, hard-won intervention to do what’s plainly rational: remove obstacles that make recovery less likely, not more?
Because here’s the uncomfortable truth: debt is one of the quietest ways we keep people trapped. It is the bureaucracy’s version of a closed door. And when it’s applied to survivors of exploitation, it starts to resemble a second punishment—this time for daring to survive in the first place.
Canceling 100,000 shekels doesn’t erase the harm she endured. But it does something almost as important: it restores the possibility of a future that isn’t permanently hostage to her past.
“It gives her hope,” said her attorney, Tamar.
Hope isn’t a slogan. It’s infrastructure. And sometimes, the most effective rehabilitation program begins with the simplest policy decision of all: stop charging people for their trauma.