The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) has expressed grave concern over alleged violations of international law arising from the recent escalation of hostilities in Lebanon, while cautiously noting that diplomatic developments following high-level discussions held at the White House in the United States between Israel’s and Lebanon’s ambassadors may influence the trajectory of the conflict.

The IBAHRI emphasises that any political progress must be accompanied by full compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law, as well as accountability for any alleged violations.

The meeting hosted by US President Donald Trump has been presented as a step towards de-escalation, reinforcing the existing temporary ceasefire framework between Israel and Lebanon. Meanwhile the humanitarian crisis has worsened in Lebanon, with Israel continuing to demolish homes and journalists being killed after alleged targeting.

While the IBAHRI acknowledges that renewed diplomatic engagement may contribute to reducing hostilities, it underscores that such developments do not alter the legal obligations of parties to the conflict nor diminish the seriousness of reported violations.

On 8 April 2026, Israel launched its largest wave of strikes on Lebanese territory since 1980, reportedly targeting more than 100 sites across 50 locations, including the densely populated areas of Beirut and the Bekaa Valley. The escalation occurred in the broader context of the US-Israel-Iran conflict initiated in February without authorisation from the United Nations Security Council. Despite a ceasefire agreement between the US, Israel and Iran – brokered by Pakistan and announced on 7 April 2026 – Israeli officials publicly rejected the inclusion of Lebanon from the scope of the ceasefire and continued their military operations.

Mark Stephens CBE, IBAHRI Co-Chair, commented: ‘The renewed diplomatic engagement following the recent White House meeting is a potentially important step towards de-escalation. However, it is critical to emphasise that ceasefire discussions or political agreements do not provide legal justification for prior or ongoing uses of force that fall outside the scope of international law. The reported strikes in Lebanon raise serious questions under Article 51 of the UN Charter and appear inconsistent with the strict requirements governing self-defence. These attacks reportedly occurred without warning, in potential violation of obligations to protect civilians under Article 57(2)(c) of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions.’

Reports indicate that strikes targeted hundreds of Hezbollah infrastructure sites located within civilian areas in central Beirut, constituting prima facie violations of the principles of distinction and proportionality under international humanitarian law, as codified in Articles 48, 51(4) and 51(5)(b) of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, as well as the obligation to take all feasible precautions in attack under Article 57.

According to the Lebanese Ministry of Health, more than 2,294 people were killed from the aggression between 2 March and 16 April 2026, including 172 children, and 7,544 were injured, among them 661 children. The 8 April strikes alone reportedly killed at least 357 people and injured over 1,200. UNICEF reports that at least ten per cent of those killed were children. In a statement, UN experts condemned the unprecedented bombing as a ‘blatant violation of the UN Charter, a deliberate destruction of prospects for peace, and an affront to multilateralism and the UN-based international order’.

The humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate. Since early March, more than 1.2 million people – over one fifth of Lebanon’s population – have been forcibly displaced, including, by UNICEF estimates, 390,000 children. The IBAHRI notes that such large-scale forced displacement may amount to a war crime under Article 8(2)(e)(viii) of the Rome Statute, which prohibits the displacement of civilians unless required for their security or imperative military reasons. Where carried out as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population, such conduct may also constitute a crime against humanity under Article 7(1)(d) of the Rome Statute.

The IBAHRI is also concerned by the attacks on medical personnel and facilities. According to figures from the Lebanese Ministry of Health, between 2 March and 16 April 2026, Israeli strikes killed 100 medical workers and injured 233, with at least 25 hospitals damaged and six forced to close.

Allegations persist of 242 repeated attacks on medical services, with 101 of these incidents reportedly involving ambulances and ‘double-tap’ strikes targeting first responders, including an incident on 12 April involving a clearly marked Lebanese Red Cross ambulance that had coordinated safe passage with UN peacekeeping forces. These attacks may constitute violations of the special protections afforded to medical personnel and units under international humanitarian law, including Articles 12 and 15 of Additional Protocol I and Article 18 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Intentionally directing attacks against medical personnel and facilities constitutes a war crime under Article 8(2)(b)(ix) of the Rome Statute.

At least nine journalists have reportedly been killed in Lebanon by Israel’s military since 2 March 2026, including three in a single strike on their vehicle on 28 March. Israeli authorities later alleged, without presenting evidence, that one of the journalists was affiliated with a militant group. Under international humanitarian law journalists are civilians and intentionally targeting them constitutes a war crime under Article 8(2)(b)(i) of the Rome Statute.

While ceasefires play a critical role in reducing immediate violence, they do not suspend or replace obligations under international humanitarian law. Parties to a conflict remain bound at all times by the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution, regardless of whether active hostilities are ongoing. Moreover, ceasefire agreements do not absolve states or individuals of responsibility for alleged violations committed prior to or during the conflict. Under international law, there remains a continuing obligation to investigate credible allegations of war crimes and, where appropriate, to prosecute those responsible.

Hina Jilani, IBAHRI Co-Chair, stated: ‘Diplomatic developments, including those emerging from Washington, may offer a pathway to reducing hostilities. However, international humanitarian law is unequivocal: civilian life and infrastructure, including medical personnel and journalists, must never be targeted. The scale, intensity and apparent pattern of Israel’s strikes on Lebanon raise serious concerns of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. A ceasefire, while welcome, cannot substitute for accountability. Independent investigations into alleged violations remain an essential legal requirement. Accountability is not optional and we will continue to advocate firmly for its enforcement.’

Baroness Helena Kennedy LT KC, Director of the IBAHRI, commented: ‘The indiscriminate and unjustified attacks carried out by Israel on Lebanese territory are deeply alarming. What is urgently required is the protection of civilians long term. The recent White House discussions underscore the importance of sustained diplomatic engagement, and the ceasefire presents a critical opportunity to halt further violence and harm. Yet, any cessation of hostilities must be accompanied by concrete measures to ensure compliance with international law. International legal and humanitarian obligations unequivocally require all parties to protect civilian life, irrespective of any military objectives. The protection of civilians is not contingent on political negotiations. It is an absolute legal obligation. This moment must be used not only to halt violence, but to secure adherence to the rules governing armed conflict and to ensure accountability where those rules have been breached.’

The IBAHRI calls on the international community to:

• press all parties to the conflict to adhere to the ceasefire agreements and to engage in meaningful diplomatic efforts to ensure a durable and just peace in the region;
• ensure urgent, safe and unhindered humanitarian access and aid delivery across Lebanon, support reconstruction efforts and facilitate the return of displaced communities;
• establish and support thorough and independent investigations into alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights law; and
• in light of credible evidence of serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in Lebanon by Israeli forces, urge all states to suspend arms transfers to Israel in accordance with their international legal obligations.

ENDS

Contact: IBAHRI@int-bar.org

Notes

1. On 14 April 2026, Israel and Lebanon held US-mediated direct talks, the first since 1983. Israel reiterated its demand for the disarmament of all non-state armed groups, including Hezbollah, while Lebanon called for an immediate ceasefire and urgent humanitarian measures. On 16 April, US President Donald Trump announced that Israel and Lebanon had agreed to a ten-day ceasefire. On 23 April, the ceasefire was extended by mutual agreement. According to a statement issued by the US State Department, the agreement reaffirms Israel’s right to act in self-defence against any imminent or ongoing threats, while obliging Lebanon to curb attacks from Hezbollah and other armed groups.

2. Related material:
   • IBA and IBAHRI statement on the Israel-US-Iran conflict

3. The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), established in 1995 under Founding Honorary President Nelson Mandela, is an autonomous and financially independent entity, working to promote, protect and enforce human rights under a just rule of law, and to preserve the independence of the judiciary and the legal profession worldwide.

4. Find the IBAHRI (@IBAHRI) on social media here:
   • x.com/IBAHRI
   • bsky.app/profile/ibahri.bsky.social
   • facebook.com/IBAhumanrights
   • linkedin.com/in/iba-human-rights-institute

5. The International Bar Association (IBA), the global voice of the legal profession, is the foremost organisation for international legal practitioners, bar associations and law societies. Established in 1947, shortly after the creation of the United Nations, it was born out of the conviction that an organisation made up of the worlds' bar associations could contribute to global stability and peace through the administration of justice.

Website page link for this news release:

Short link: tinyurl.com/d9rz3bf6
Full link: www.ibanet.org/IBAHRI-condemns-Israels-large-scale-strikes-on-Lebanon-and-calls-for-accountability-and-lasting-peace