Rights groups call Israeli strike that killed Lebanese journalist Amal Khalil an apparent war crime, as Israel denies targeting media

Lebanese journalist Amal Khalil was killed and her colleague Zeinab Faraj was wounded in an Israeli attack in April, rights organizations said in a report released this week, arguing the incident shows evidence consistent with an apparent war crime. The BBC reported that Khalil and Faraj were on location as media workers when the strike occurred, and that campaigners are pressing for an investigation into whether the attack complied with laws governing the conduct of hostilities.

According to the rights groups cited by the BBC, the groups reviewed available information about the circumstances of the strike and concluded that the killings appear to fit patterns of unlawful harm to journalists. The organizations’ characterization centers on whether sufficient precautions were taken and whether the journalists could have been identified as noncombatants at the time of the attack.

Israel denied that it targeted journalists, according to the BBC report. Israel’s response, as described there, frames the attack as the result of military operations rather than an effort to harm members of the press. The denial underscores the core dispute in the case: whether the media personnel were intentionally targeted or whether the strike was conducted without unlawful intent.

The incident has drawn renewed scrutiny because journalists are protected under international humanitarian law, including rules that require parties to distinguish between civilians and lawful military targets. Rights groups say the deaths of journalists can impede public access to information and create fear within local media networks, particularly in conflict zones where movement can already be restricted.

The BBC report ties the April deaths to broader concerns raised by human rights monitors about accountability for civilian harm during cross-border fighting involving Israel and groups in Lebanon. While such disputes often hinge on contested details that can take time to resolve, rights advocates are calling for transparent review processes, including access to relevant evidence and mechanisms to ensure that findings are not limited to one side’s account.

For authorities, the practical next step is whether an independent investigation, rather than an internal military review, is conducted and whether findings address the specific allegations made by the rights organizations. Questions highlighted by the case include how the strike was authorized, what targeting standards were applied, and what precautions were taken when media personnel were present.

In the meantime, the killing of Khalil and the injury of Faraj are being used by rights groups as an example of the risks faced by noncombatants during hostilities. The BBC report indicates that the organizations are treating the incident as a test of whether accountability mechanisms will function during an active security crisis, and whether journalists’ protected status is respected in practice.