UN Geneva - Multimedia Newsroom : OHCHR - Press Conference: Chief of OPT Office

Good morning, everyone.

I think we can start with the press conference

this morning.

Our office has published a report on six emblematic

attacks by the Israeli defence forces in Gaza last year

that led to high numbers of civilian fatalities and widespread destruction

of civilian objects.

These attacks raise serious concerns under the laws of war,

with respect to the principles of distinction,

proportionality and precautions in attack.

The report details six emblematic attacks involving the suspected use of GB U, 31 S,

or £2000 bombs,

GB U 32

£1000 bombs and GB U, 39 S,

£250 bombs

from the ninth of October

to the second of December 2023 on residential buildings, a school, refugee camps

and a market.

Such bombs are mostly used to penetrate through several floors of concrete

and can completely collapse tall structures.

Given how densely populated the areas targeted were,

the use of an explosive weapon with such wide area effects

is highly likely to amount to a prohibited

indiscriminate attack, the report finds.

The effects of such weapons

in these areas cannot be limited as required by international law,

resulting in military objects,

civilians and civilian objects being struck without distinction, it adds.

The report concludes that these Israeli strikes

indicate that the ID F may have repeatedly

violated fundamental fundamental principles of the laws of war

in this connection.

It notes that unlawful targeting,

when committed as part of a widespread

or systematic attack against a civilian population

in line with the state or organisational policy,

may also implicate the commission of crimes against humanity.

Israel's choices of methods and means of conducting

hostilities in Gaza since the seventh of October,

including through the use of the extensive use of explosive

weapons with white area effects in densely populated areas,

have failed to ensure that they

effectively distinguish between civilians and fighters.

On the 11th of November 2023

the ID F stated that since the start of their operation into Gaza,

the air force had struck over 5000 targets

to eliminate threats in real time.

By that time,

the Ministry of Health in Gaza had documented the killing of 11,078 Palestinians,

with another 2700 missing

and about 27,490

reportedly injured

at around the time of these attacks.

An ID F spokesperson was reported to have said

that

while balancing accuracy with scope of damage,

right now we're focused on what causes maximum damage.

Another ID F official was quoted as saying.

Hamas

and the residents of Gaza are human beasts

and are dealt with accordingly.

Israel has. I

has imposed a total blockade on Gaza, he says.

No electricity and no water, just damage

you wanted. Hell,

you will get hell,

he said

in one of the UH six attacks. The strikes on Ash

Sujaya neighbourhood

in Gaza City on the second of December 2023

destruction spread across an approximate

diagonal span of 130 metres.

15 buildings were destroyed

and at least 14 others were damaged.

The extent of the damage and the craters visible through verified visual evidence

and satellite imagery

indicates that approximately nine GB U 30 ones were used.

Our office received information

that at least 60 people

were killed.

The report also states that in five of the attacks, no warning was issued,

raising concerns with respect to violations of the

principle of precaution in attack to protect civilians.

In three of the strikes

the ID F asserted it had targeted individuals connected to the

attacks on Israel on the 7th and 8th of October 2023.

As the report sets out, however,

the mere presence of one commander or even several

fighters or of several distinct military objectives in one area

does not turn any entire neighbourhood into a military objective,

as this would violate the principle of proportionality

and the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks.

While the focus of the report is on Israel,

it also highlights that Palestinian armed groups have

continued to fire indiscriminate projectiles toward Israel,

inconsistent with their obligations under international humanitarian law.

The report also stresses the obligation to protect

civilians and civilian objects by avoiding locating military objectives

in or near densely populated areas.

The High Commissioner calls on Israel to make public,

detailed findings on these incidents.

It should also ensure thorough

and independent investigations into these and all other similar incidents

with a view to identifying those responsible for violations,

holding them to account

and to ensuring all victims rights to truth, justice and reparations.

Thank you.

Thank you. Jeremy. Uh, we'll now pass the floor to the head of our office.

Uh, for the occupied Palestinian territory.

Ajit San,

who has just returned from Gaza.

And then we'll take questions.

Ajit, over to you, please.

Thank you, Ravina. Thank you. Colleagues,

colleagues. Uh, good morning.

I've just returned from Gaza.

I was there from 13 to 18 June,

during which I visited several locations, including

Kunis,

Almasi

in Rafa

and Deir

Al Bala.

I visited Gaza in my capacity as

the protection coordinator in humanitarian response.

The sounds of bombs, guns, drones are constant.

The sound of war is non stop

day and night.

In my 22 years of work at the UN,

including in many conflict and post conflict situations,

I've never seen

such challenges for the UN

and human rights and humanitarian aid partners to operate.

The destruction is unimaginable.

The landscape of

Kunis, for instance, has been changed.

It's full of completely and partially destroyed buildings, Infrastructure.

People I met told me how they have moved 10 times.

They're exhausted.

They're barely surviving.

There are camps everywhere.

Everyone is worried not only about

the here and now,

but also about what next?

All of them not only don't have a plan, B,

they don't have a plan. A

They don't know what to do.

They're simply living day to day.

The only question they have is

when is when this will all end.

There is a real sense of helplessness,

and when you move 10 times,

your community support networks fall apart.

Even so,

there are organisations

that are still trying to provide

support and protection services in this impossible situation

to the most vulnerable.

For instance, unaccompanied Children, victims of gender-based violence,

people with disabilities, individuals who have lost their entire families.

D

al Bala was already densely populated before people fled here, a

mas

to escape the carnage of Rafa

and the North.

Now

people are living on top of one another.

At one Umra school I visited, there were 14,000 people

there.

They have just 25 toilets.

It's unimaginable.

I met doctors at Alexa

Hospital who described the situation as dire.

Beyond the killing wrought by the bombs and guns,

they talk about waterborne diseases, scabies and other diseases.

The hospitals are packed to overflowing

and the smell is unbearable.

In most parts of Gaza,

you see garbage everywhere.

For hundreds and hundreds of metres,

sewage is spilling into tents.

There is no clean water.

I fear a significant number will die from illness.

If the bombs don't kill

disease will.

The psychosocial impact of this frightening is frightening.

The fabric of society has been ripped apart.

As the High Commissioner has repeatedly said,

the hostages must be released,

the binding decisions of the Security Council and

of the International Court of Justice must be respected

and there must be a ceasefire now

beyond the humanitarian catastrophe.

Our office

has also been assessing Israel choices of

methods and means of conducting hostilities.

Today's report

looks at the extensive use of explosive weapons

with wide area affects in densely populated areas

and how they have failed to ensure

that they effectively distinguish between civilians and fighters.

The report details a pattern of attacks

using heavy bombs in densely populated areas.

This raises serious concerns under the laws of war,

with respect to the principles of distinction,

proportionality and precautions In the attack,

International humanitarian law lays out

the very clear obligations of parties to armed conflicts

that make protection of civilians a priority.

It's now eight months since the first

of these extremely serious incidents occurred,

yet still there is no clarity as to what happened or steps towards accountability.

Thank you.

Thanks very much,

Ajit. Um, we will take questions in the room first.

Uh, but I understand there is a technical issue with the video in the room.

It's working fine on the Webcast and online.

Um, so we'll just take a very brief, uh, technical pause

and then come to the questions. Apologies for that.

If the Webcast is working fine

and it's just about the rule,

then

apologies for that. It's It's a It's a problem in the room.

Um, are there any questions in the room before we take the questions on the platform?

Yep.

Uh, given that

we're not very many in the room, uh, I think I'll take this opportunity.

just about the methodology. Uh, why these six attacks in particular?

Um, I understand it's because there were large number of casualties.

Uh, but just wondering how that selection was made.

Um, And if there's any intention to analyse

other attacks, um,

to,

uh,

you are in the meeting now to, um, recording and

more, uh, more of an evidence base. Um, for for future reports. Thank you.

Thanks. Gabriella. Uh,

Ajit,

can you hear us?

Ajit

Oh, dear. He seems to have the screen seems to have frozen.

We'll we'll send him a message. Um, could you send him a message? Um, Jeremy, So that

Ajit, Can you hear us now?

No. We'll try to get him back online. Um,

in the meantime, Gabriella to to address your question.

Um, this was an assessment of six emblematic cases.

Um, where we were able to assess, uh,

the kinds of weapons that were being used and the

means and the method of carrying out these attacks.

Um, and these are, you know, uh, attacks prior to to the end of december.

Uh, but unfortunately, we have seen a continued pattern, um, of such attacks,

um, the types of weapons that were used,

the means and the manner in which they were used, Uh, coupled with, you know,

some of the statements, um, that you heard from Israeli officials, uh,

give rise to very serious concerns about

the compliance with international humanitarian law.

Um, and we felt that it was important to put this report out now, especially because

in the case of some of these attacks, some eight months have passed.

Um, and we are yet to see investigations, um, credible investigations and, uh,

you know, transparent investigations into these incidents.

as time passes, it becomes much more difficult to carry out these investigations.

So it is crucial that

we call first on the Israeli authorities to take steps

to ensure that proper investigations transparent investigations are held.

Um, And in the absence of this and if there is continued impunity,

uh, there is a need for international action in this regard as well.

I think we have Ajit back online now. Ajit, do you hear us? Now,

did you hear the question from Reuters

about why these particular six incidents were selected to examine?

Sure.

Um, look, I mean, this covers, uh, October to December, and if you recall,

this was a time of, um, heavy civilian casualties,

Um, we had alarm bells ringing when we saw the civilian casualties increasing.

Um, we start with that as a reference point and look at, um,

what else has been done from a military point of view,

including the nature of weapons that's been used.

so it became very clear to us that the nature of weapons that were used, um,

especially on wide area, um that have wide area effect,

um, is extremely dangerous in the context of Gaza. And we've been saying this,

in in several reports and statements

that Gaza is an is a very densely populated area.

And

in these six incidents, we had

sufficient information to demonstrate,

uh, the civilian casualties both in terms of the death

as well as, um, injuries

and where we felt that the

principles of international humanitarian law particularly

precaution distinction,

uh, proportionality,

um, were not necessarily followed.

Um, hence we thought it was important to put it out.

Um, so that, um,

this this stops. Thank you.

Thanks, Musa.

Thank you very much.

I have a question about about the source of this type

of weapon.

Are they American weapons or Israeli weapons? Thank you.

No. Perhaps you need to log off and log back on.

Ajith. Apologies for this.

Oh,

you can hear us now. Great. Did you Did you hear the question, please?

Yes. Um, look, I think, uh, I think based on, uh uh,

the serial number of some of these weapons,

it is possible to identify where these weapons are

manufactured.

Um, so at this point in time, I will leave it there.

We do know a number of countries also provide weapons to Israel. So,

I would say it is important for us to look at the the

serial numbers of these weapons and and say where it's coming from.

Uh uh. If I may just, uh, add as well.

with respect to, uh, third states, uh, providing weapons?

Um, A as a JD has said,

I don't think we can categorically say where where the

weapons came from until you actually get that serial number.

But

when it comes to international law,

and particularly under the common Article one of the Geneva Conventions,

that there is

a

crucial element to this and it's it's

to respect and ensure respect for the conventions.

so all states have obligations under international

law applicable to the transfer of weapons.

So it's it's really quite clear under the Geneva Conventions that

that is the case.

Thanks. We'll go to the platform now. We have Yuri from R

University, please.

Yes. Thank you, Ravina. Good morning. And thank you for this briefing.

My question is in regards to the words that

you use in the report and during the presentation.

You take a lot of precautions in your remarks regarding Israel.

You are using terms like could maybe seems.

Why such precautions on bombings that you have never left an ala.

This is like you are not accusing Israel of the nation. It seems that maybe they have.

Why this terminology?

Thanks,

Yi, I'll I'll give the floor to Ajit first, and then we can supplement.

Thank you, Yuri. And and thanks,

sinna.

We we,

uh, mostly useless language, not just in the case of Israel, but, uh,

in in most other circumstances and situations as well.

And I worked in a number of other conflict and post conflict, um, cases.

So it's not specific to Israel. We do want to ensure that we give

national investigations a chance to fully go in depth,

uh, do further investigation.

For instance, in our report,

we say that five of the incidents that we have talked about

Israel as open fact finding.

Um uh, you know, initiatives,

in our belief, that's not sufficient. That's a good start.

But you need to go further and they have to open an independent investigation. So

there is

that possibility of gathering,

um, further information and and and investigation as well.

But we are also not a court of law. So we do leave some of those,

um, clear,

uh uh,

categorization of of crimes to the court of law. So that's where I'll stop. Thanks.

Thanks, Yuri. And I think, uh, you know what you will see in the report?

Um, is that, uh,

we have quite clear findings based on the facts that we were

able to gather and the analysis that we were able to do.

And we have found that, um, you know, in these cases, um,

there are indications that statistics suggest that Israel has failed

to ensure that they effectively distinguish between civilians and combatants.

We have seen concerns about patterns of

systemic violations of the principles of necessity,

distinction, proportionality and precaution in attack.

It sets out very clearly

that Israel appears to have taken an expansive view of their approach of

the kind of means and methods of warfare that they are using.

All of these raise very serious concerns

about compliance with international humanitarian law.

As Ajit said, we are not a court of law.

So it is up to a competent judicial body to

establish conclusively whether this amounts

to a particular international crime.

And there is, of course,

engagement by various international bodies currently on this situation.

Um, we have a question as well. From ANAs

of a FP, please.

Yes. Hi, everybody. Thank you for taking my question.

Um, in fact, it's a few ones. Um, first one, you say that the report is, uh, on Israel.

Uh, could you, uh, explain why?

And does it mean that you plan to do a separate report on, uh, what you mentioned?

The Palestinian armed groups firing, uh,

indiscriminate projects

to Israel.

and then on the attacks. Uh, sorry. I didn't listen.

All the the question of Reuters and the answer of of Ra Ravina.

Uh, why specifically did you choose, uh, six attacks.

Um, how much do you think they are? Uh, globally.

And, uh, specifically why you didn't, uh,

decide to investigate the attack on the 17th October on the Ali Arab hospital,

which did hundreds of deaths. Um, is it because you you

thought that it wasn't an Israeli attack? Thank you.

Thanks. Anya. Over to Ajith

Fist.

Yeah. Thank you.

Um, just to say that, um, yes, this is a report that focuses quite heavily on Israel,

mainly because that the

the weapons that are being used are by Israel. This is the these weapons are not

in possession of the Palestinian armed group, for instance,

um, and these weapons have caused us, uh, severe, uh, civilian casualties.

So the focus was

on,

drawing attention to the heavy civilian casualties in Gaza

at that point in time between October and December.

Um, similar kind of weapons don't exist with the Palestinian armed groups

and even the missiles that are fired, and it is absolutely unacceptable.

And it is also a crime

have not caused significant,

um, killing since,

uh,

you know, uh, since the since during the war, uh, due to the firing of missiles,

So the the focus is quite limited.

Now, on the

the firing of missiles

in every report that the officers produce,

whether it is the High Commissioner's report or local ones,

we have constantly highlighted that.

And that is also,

um, a war crime, considering it is, uh, indiscriminate by by nature.

the second question, I've already answered why we focused on these six particular,

um uh, incidents,

um, on your question on the 17th of October.

Um, I would say the reason why we focused on these six is because we had, uh,

a lot more information, and we were quite confident of putting it out.

Um, the others. And you're right There are two or three.

I mean, including the Palestinian response. If you look at it, they mentioned it.

Um, we did not have, uh, full information to go by it.

Thanks. Ajit Uh, Christian of DP. A

uh, thank you, Ravina.

Uh, I have a question on the principle of, uh, proportionality.

Um, hiding military materials or fighters in civilian areas.

As you mentioned, uh uh, must be avoided

now, I, I understand the principles, but

somehow the law is very vague. Um,

and it's extremely

it's It's a difficult and distressing territory. But how do you determine,

uh,

what determines

whether an attack is proportional

or not?

Is is this a body count or or ho ho? How

What are the pointers as to, uh, what is proportionate? What is not? And

maybe more importantly, who determines that

Thank you.

Thanks. Christiane Ajit over to you first.

Thanks a lot. I mean, it is indeed of course, Uh, it's a very important question.

Look, I mean, the proportionality of distinction as well. Uh, the principles

don't disappear because, uh, there are weapons hidden in civilian areas,

and this is a point that we make in the report as well.

The principles of distinction proportionality

will continue to be there

even

when armed groups, for instance, uh, hide within civilian population,

you will have to take into account the military gains that you will achieve

and the loss of civilian,

casualties,

um, including infrastructure and and injuries and and death into account.

So that's always the the the balance that you need to to to make,

Um

uh,

So

this is where we have also referred in our reports. If you go back and look at it,

that in some cases the military objectives

have not been mentioned at all.

In some cases, they were lower ranking Hamas members.

And there you lost about 60 civilians or so. So you need to look at that.

What have you gained

by striking

at a particular set of buildings

to get a lower rank ranking Hamas leader or a mid-level? Um,

and lose hundreds of civilians.

Um, who makes those decisions.

I think there are a range of people involved in that

from the high from from battle commander to to others.

so they are the ones,

and they are They are the ones who who

have to make those decisions considering and looking into,

uh, all these aspects.

And that's exactly why I think in in the press statement that we read out,

we also talked a little bit about some of the statements that were made by

high level officials, which gives an intention

or indication that some of these principles were

not necessarily important at that point in time.

Thanks, Ajit.

And if I may supplement, um, Christiane, just referring back to the report,

you'll see how staggering the figures are.

Um, according to the Israeli air Force,

between the seventh of October 2023 and the 19th of

February 2024 over 29,000 targets in Gaza were attacked.

The war has also witnessed the destruction of

100 and 28,904 housing units between the seventh of October and the first of April.

The report also makes clear that, um

I mean, our Our monitoring indicates that the IDF, as I said,

has taken an expansive approach to targeting,

as Ajit was saying,

apparently considering members of the de facto civilian

administration and Hamas political structure is not directly

participating in hostilities as well as civilian objects

belonging to de facto authorities as legitimate targets.

Now, this is in violation of the principle of distinction

under

the presence of Palestinian armed groups within the civilian population does not

deprive the population in the Gaza Strip of its civilian character.

That is very important to point out.

Sorry. John Zarak.

Costas.

Uh, yes. Good morning. Uh, I presume you can hear me there.

Hello?

Hi.

Yes,

I was just interested.

Um, if you could elaborate a bit, uh, uh,

reference to compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law.

Can, uh, can you elaborate a little bit more?

And how does this dovetail with the arms trade treaty?

Especially if the country concern is not a signatory.

And secondly, given the nature of the bombs and and the size

of the detonations,

do you have data on the kind of injuries uh, that have been documented?

For instance, say if whole buildings are collapsing

Do you have a high number of amputations, for example? And what did your data

from the injured people show for these six incidents? Thank you.

Thanks. John. Ajit.

Thanks. Um on, uh, the compliance of IHL and human rights. Uh, law, I mean,

this is

the fundamental findings of the report or the fundamental reason why we are put out.

We believe that the principles of IHL,

um have not been followed by using, um, this wide range wide,

um

uh, wide impact, Uh uh, bombs,

Um, and particularly on, um, distinction Precaution, um, proportionality

as well as military necessity.

Um, that's exactly the the the the reason why we put this report out,

um, and and the same with human rights, I think.

I mean, if you look at look at it from a right to life perspective or any other, um,

rights in in Gaza at this point in time,

uh, we see a massive violation of that nature as well.

Um, we know

the

injuries have been massive,

uh,

more generally, but also in these six, incidents,

um, amputations have been significant. Um, limbs,

uh,

you know, uh, injuries to other parts of the bodies

uh, so on and so forth.

I cannot give you the exact number of, um,

injuries in this specific in these six specific, um, incidents.

If you look at, uh, the report as well,

we do mention OHC HR verified casualties as well.

So

some of these things will take a bit of time. Thanks.

Uh,

over to Jeremy on the arms trade question.

So

when it comes to the arm

arms trade treaty,

uh, John, you write the as, you know, the the US Uh,

the Trump administration unsigned that, um,

a

number of years ago,

but

the obligations as I mentioned earlier under the, uh,

under the Geneva Convention still apply

that, um, those are set in stone. Nothing changes.

And as you will recall, a number of states have already suspended,

uh, their actions with respect to supplying weapons, arms, uh, military, uh,

hardware.

I recall the Netherlands. Uh, I think it was earlier this year.

Um, amongst others. So

yeah, let's Let's There is the arms trade treaty. You're absolutely right.

Uh, but there are other treaties as well, and let's go back to the

the bedrock treaty of of them all. And that is the Geneva Conventions.

Thanks, Jeremy. Uh, Jamie Keaton. A P.

Thanks. Ravina.

Um, Mrs

I just wanted to, um

I I've seen an Israeli response to, uh, the background note.

I guess that was, uh, circulated before the release of this report.

And, uh, they mentioned in there that,

uh, OHC HR, um, actually doesn't have, uh,

full information about the circumstances of these military operations.

And they accuse you of bi or they accuse OHC HR of bias.

Um, in this report, what do you say to that?

Um, I think it's unfortunate.

Um, but at the same time, what I can say is Look, we have uh, uh, experts in our office

in our team.

Um, including military advisor for, um, we have looked at satellite pictures.

We have consulted Military Advisor outside the office to get more than one opinion.

We are quite solid in our analysis.

Um, and we are sure of what I mean, to the extent possible.

We we are sure of what we put out.

Um

uh, So, in that sense, um,

you know, we're quite confident.

Bias? It's something we've heard before. Um, look, we are an independent office.

Uh, we have been doing monitoring and reporting on human rights violations

for many years now.

Um, the fact that there are over 37,000 civilians killed in in Gaza

can't be taken away,

most of them civilians and women and Children.

Um, the fact that these bombs are being, um, used, um is also, uh,

something that can't be taken away.

Um, and the fact that these are wide area affected, you know, effective bombs,

um are also

can it is something that that that that can't be taken away.

Um, it's interesting

testing

and encouraging

to start with to see.

Israel has initiated fact finding on five of

the six incidents that we have referred to.

Uh, but we believe they have to go further and do a full investigation.

And an investigation by the military advocate general itself is not sufficient.

Um, and this is a problem that we've seen before.

And we have constantly pointed out that it has to be independent from the military

advocate advocate General

because the military advocate general is also providing advice

to the Israeli defence force. So one cannot be a judge in his own case.

Thanks.

Sait. Uh, we'll go to Nick first.

And then there's a follow up from Christiane of DP

a Nick Cumming Bruce of the New York Times,

please.

Thank you.

yeah, I. I mean, your report says,

you know, 29,000

and you've picked,

which you say are emblematic, um, to call them emblematic.

You must have done more detailed analysis of of, of a wide number of other strikes.

And I just wonder if you could

expand a little bit on on on how much detailed analysis you have been able to do

and whether you have, um, referred more than these six to the mag for, um

uh, investigation. Thank you.

Thanks, Nick. I mean, as you know, it's extremely difficult to get information, um,

on anything that's happening in Gaza.

Um, So we have looked into a number of incidents of similar nature.

Um, including some of the ones that were mentioned today, 17th of October,

the ones referred by Palestinians in their response to us.

Um, but where we did not have sufficient information, we simply had to drop it.

And this goes back to also the bias allegation that Israel mentioned.

Uh, we could, for instance, have gone further,

and we did not because we were not satisfied with it.

So we do believe that we put out things that we are solid from our end.

on the question of have we shared further information with

the military advocate general on other issues or on this?

Um, no, I can say that quite clearly. At least from the, uh from the

the field office or H HR OPD.

We have not shared on on, um, on these incidents with Mac, but the report is out there,

and I'm pretty sure the Israelis have shared that, um, entire report with them.

Thanks.

Thanks, Christian.

Uh, yes. Thank you, Ravina.

I'm just coming back to the principles of proportionality and so on

that if

it's left to the battle commanders to decide that they

obviously come to very different conclusions than you do. And they have in the past,

uh, other pointers as to what is proportional and what is not,

against what kind of principle do they have to determine that

whether whether the attack is in order or not?

maybe you can be a bit more concrete on this one.

Thanks, Christina. So let me let me say this that yes, it is the pa.

I mean, my response was that it is the battle commander

responsibility at that point in time or you know, a range of others in the hierarchy.

But it doesn't mean others cannot

assess whether that was right or wrong.

And that's exactly what we are trying to do here.

The second point is on proportionality.

Let's step take a step back out here on the focus of this report, which is

proportionality, distinction,

precaution,

necessity

vis a vis the kind of weapons that's being used.

Our message here is that

these weapons

in a densely populated area like Gaza,

particularly now and in the past as well

it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible,

to follow those four principles,

so

it's

advisable

not to use them.

Thanks,

Sait and Christiane.

Also,

in response to your question about what principles

they need to follow international humanitarian law,

these are the laws of war.

These are the laws that battle commanders, those with command responsibility,

the soldiers on the ground.

Everyone is bound by the laws of war.

I don't see any further questions in the room

or on the platform.

So thanks very much, everyone. Uh, apologies for the technical problems.

Uh, and thanks very much to Ajit for participating today. Thanks. Bye.

Thanks. Thanks. So thank you. Bye bye.

OHCHR - Press Conference: Chief of OPT Office - 19 June 2024