Han Yunus Massacres

The Han Yunus Massacres refer to a series of events in which civilians in Han Yunus and surrounding settlements in southern Gaza were either collectively killed or buried in mass graves, particularly during incidents in 1956, 2014 (Huzaa), and 2024. During the 1956 Suez War, Israeli military units killed more than 600 Egyptians and Palestinians in Han Yunus.^【1】 The massacre is kept alive in local and international collective memory through annual commemorations held in the town.

Following the 2014 massacre in Huzaa, a neighborhood of Han Yunus, limited access for ambulances during brief ceasefires led to bodies being retrieved over several days using rudimentary means. Reports describe corpses covered with blankets and sheets lying in the streets.

In 2024, after a siege and withdrawal, civil defense teams in the area of the Nasser Medical Complex in Han Yunus recovered numerous bodies from mass graves. UN Human Rights Office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani reported that some bodies were found with their hands bound and stripped of clothing.^【2】

Geography and Infrastructure

Han Yunus has served as a central hub in southern Gaza, situated at the intersection of north–south civilian mobility and essential service flows. The town lies on a flat settlement belt extending from the coast to inland areas, forming an administratively and logistically integrated region with surrounding neighborhoods and villages.

Historically, housing and supply networks in the region operated at high density. Even in the autumn of 1956, the majority of Gaza’s population depended on international aid distributed through this area for regular food and basic services; supply routes were periodically opened and closed despite curfews to sustain deliveries.

As the present day approaches, intensified attacks along the northern axis and mass displacement toward the south have significantly increased Han Yunus’s burden. Within a short time, the shelter, food, and basic hygiene needs of hundreds of thousands of people accumulated in the town and surrounding facilities. This pressure was partially addressed by converting educational buildings and public facilities into temporary shelters, pushing capacities beyond normal levels.

The health infrastructure has been shaped around two key institutions centered in Han Yunus. The Nasser Medical Complex emerged as the backbone of the referral system, providing secondary and some tertiary care services. Despite limited bed capacity, its maternal–child health and intensive care units became regional reference points.

The European Gaza Hospital has functioned as the other major reference point in southern Gaza, complementing Nasser in inpatient services and advanced diagnostic–treatment procedures. Disruptions in fuel and electricity supply created critical bottlenecks in essential operations such as cold chain management and sterilization, leading to periodic reductions or complete suspension of services.

In terms of transportation and external connectivity, Han Yunus is positioned along the north–south main road artery. Internal roads were operated as one-way corridors or priority lanes during times when aid and medical convoys were prioritized; temporary arrangements restored access to damaged sections.

The Rafah Crossing at the southern border served as a critical gateway for evacuations, referrals, and humanitarian movements; during certain periods, medical referrals and foreign aid were channeled through this route. Within this integrated framework, Han Yunus has become one of the dominant centers in southern Gaza for organizing shelter, supply, and healthcare services due to its geographic location and infrastructure nodes.

The Han Yunus Massacre (1956)

The events in Han Yunus during the autumn of 1956, within the context of the Gaza War, constitute a large-scale massacre that occurred during the implementation of the Israeli, British, and French campaign against Egypt. The civilian population of the town faced house raids accompanied by “screening and interrogation” operations; during this period, over 600 Palestinians and Egyptians were killed in Han Yunus. The incident was marked by town-wide curfews, mass deportations, and executions.

Background and Timeline (October–December 1956)

The Suez Crisis emerged after Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal in July 1956, threatening the strategic and economic interests of Britain, France, and Israel, which had previously benefited from the canal. In response, Britain and France secretly agreed with Israel in the Sèvres Accord to weaken Nasser’s regime. Under this plan, Israel would launch an attack on the Sinai Peninsula to initiate hostilities, after which Britain and France would intervene under the pretext of “separating the combatants.” The plan was executed on 29 October, when Israeli forces entered Sinai and subsequently occupied the Gaza Strip.

At this stage, Israel aimed to cripple Egypt’s military capacity in Sinai while altering the battlefield’s reality to its advantage, anticipating permanent control over Gaza and Sinai. However, intense international pressure prevented this outcome. Strong diplomatic interventions by the United States and the Soviet Union halted British–French air operations and amphibious landings, forcing Israel to withdraw from Sinai and Gaza by March 1957.

The entry of Israeli forces into Gaza occurred as part of the operational execution of this tripartite plan. Han Yunus, as one of the largest centers for humanitarian aid and food distribution along the north–south axis, was specifically targeted. Announcements during the early days of occupation instructed residents to gather at designated locations for screening operations. As civilians panicked and rushed toward these assembly points fearing delays, Israeli forces employed indiscriminate firepower, rapidly increasing the death toll.^【3】

At the outbreak of hostilities, more than two-thirds of Han Yunus’s civilian population (over 213,000 people) depended on UNRWA aid distributions. It became clear that the occupying administration could not sustain essential services; the UN agency promptly dispatched an emergency team to implement extraordinary measures to prevent disruption of food and basic services.^【4】 The losses during military operations and the destruction of civilian infrastructure hindered rapid mitigation of humanitarian consequences even after the war ended.

By late November, despite a partial military calm, screening and interrogation activities continued in a “systematic” manner; violations of the laws of war committed in the initial days persisted. This pattern demonstrates how concentrated episodes of violence in Han Yunus over several days or weeks were intertwined with broader military–administrative practices across the region, including curfews, public assembly orders, screening checkpoints, and deportation centers.

Course of Events: The Massacre in Han Yunus

It is evident that deaths in Han Yunus were concentrated over a short time period. Announcements ordering men to gather at specific locations, followed by house raids and wide-area sweeps, occurred in rapid succession; during this process, over 600 people were killed. The operation of this mass deportation–screening system followed a similar pattern in other parts of Gaza; factors such as civilian panic and indiscriminate military fire significantly increased casualties.

The massacre in Han Yunus coincides with patterns of gunfire during screenings and mass detentions recorded elsewhere in Gaza during the same period; however, the exceptionally high number of fatalities in Han Yunus has established it as a distinct landmark in the town’s collective memory.

Body Collection, Burials, and Identification

Under emergency conditions, internal movement was restricted by curfew hours and security constraints. Many corpses were buried without identification. During the incident days, main roads and intersections in the town quickly became routes for collecting and transporting bodies; carts and civilian vehicles were used to transport remains to burial sites. These conditions made it difficult to compile a detailed “list of names” afterward, increasing uncertainty in casualty figures. One of the key objectives of the commemorative and documentation efforts initiated in Han Yunus since 1956 has been to fill these identification gaps as fully as possible.

Local Memory, Commemoration, and Documentation

Annually, the municipality and the “Han Yunus Massacre Martyrs Commemoration and Documentation Committee” organize ceremonies marking the anniversary of the events. These commemorations emphasize that over 600 people were killed in the town in 1956, and repeatedly call for the names and families of the deceased to be remembered, testimonies to be collected, and legal documentation to be prepared.

These efforts aim to sustain collective memory on one hand, and on the other, to gather evidence and prepare documentation for potential use in international legal mechanisms.

The Huzaa Massacre (2014)

The events in Huzaa, a village east of Han Yunus, during the summer of 2014 created a crisis scenario in which even during brief ceasefires, full access to the area was denied. It was documented that ambulances could enter the area only under severe restrictions, forcing residents to retrieve bodies that had been waiting for days using rudimentary means. Conditions on the ground became so severe that walking without covering the mouth and nose became impossible; corpses left on the streets were covered with blankets and sheets.

Huzaa’s narrow alleyway structure and proximity to the Han Yunus urban center rendered access routes highly vulnerable. Even during short ceasefire periods, the lack of full access for ambulances led to burial and recovery operations being carried out primarily by local residents rather than professional teams. This delayed emergency medical and transport services and contributed to a growing number of waiting corpses.

For areas inaccessible for long periods, residents used ropes, hand tools, and simple lifting devices to extract bodies from rubble and uneven terrain. Corpses found on roads and open areas were covered with blankets and sheets to reduce odor and environmental contamination. This practice provided temporary protection until bodies could be moved to main routes accessible to funeral teams and ambulances.

The Huzaa incident was systematically documented by media personnel on the ground. Footage by Ali Hassan and Belal Khaled detailed the limited ambulance access and local residents’ practices of retrieving and covering corpses. Ashraf Amra’s recordings captured the scale of mass casualties and funeral rites in nearby areas as attacks continued. These visual records enabled a detailed reconstruction of the event’s temporal–spatial framework and its civilian impact.^【5】

The Nasser Hospital Massacre and Mass Graves (2024)

Following 7 October 2023, the Nasser Medical Complex in Han Yunus became one of southern Gaza’s primary referral and treatment centers. After Israeli attacks specifically targeting the maternity and intensive care units of Shifa and Nasser hospitals, shortages of fuel, electricity, and medical supplies led to a partial shutdown decision on 27 February 2024. From that date onward, intense siege conditions severely disrupted the hospital’s morgue capacity, burial procedures, and record-keeping.^【6】

Findings and Developments After the Siege

In spring 2024, following the withdrawal of Israeli forces, mass grave sites were uncovered within and around the hospital compound. Civil defense teams conducted excavation and recovery operations under conditions of limited equipment and damaged infrastructure, quickly bringing to the surface hundreds of bodies.

Local health units and field teams reported that numerous bodies could not be identified and had deteriorated severely due to prolonged lack of access. This situation hindered autopsies and identification, preventing most standard medical examinations prior to burial.

Nature of the Burial Sites

Site assessments revealed that some graves were located within the hospital grounds, such as courtyards and gardens, while others were situated in adjacent areas beyond the compound perimeter. During the siege, it was reported that Israeli forces buried civilians in mass graves, and that hospital staff, facing risks of infectious disease and foul odor after morgues became inoperable, resorted to emergency temporary burials. After access was restored, these areas were reopened through excavation.

Among the recovered bodies were elderly individuals, women, and injured persons. In some cases, bodies were found with hands bound or stripped of clothing. Han Yunus Civil Defense authorities pointed to findings suggesting the possibility that some individuals were alive at the time of burial or killed at close range, calling for a systematic, expert-led investigation.^【7】

Identification, Documentation, and Family Notifications

Partial destruction of hospital records during the conflict, staff displacement, and collapse of communication infrastructure created major obstacles to identification. For recovered bodies, facial and physical features, dental records, personal belongings, and family testimonies were cross-referenced; however, the extent of decomposition limited definitive identifications. Family reports of missing persons were cross-checked with previous patient and visitor lists and temporary burial maps within the compound to support naming efforts.

Investigation Demands and Counterclaims

Following the discovery of mass graves, calls were made internationally for an independent and effective investigation. It was emphasized that attacks on hospitals and burial practices under siege must be evaluated in light of rules protecting medical facilities. Allegations regarding bodies found with bound hands and stripped clothing drew particular attention; in response, Israeli authorities denied claims that its forces buried Palestinians in mass graves, despite the absence of conclusive evidence to the contrary.

Continuity: Degradation of Medical Infrastructure from 2024 to 2025

Even before investigations into the 2024 mass graves were completed, the Nasser Medical Complex faced the risk of being forced out of service; in the following period, the facility and its surroundings were targeted again. On 13 May 2025, the hospital’s burn unit was struck, damaging services; on the same day, the internal courtyards and surrounding areas of the European Gaza Hospital were also attacked, resulting in numerous casualties.

These attacks led to the near-total collapse of advanced medical services in southern Gaza—including oncology—and the disruption of the referral chain. Thus, the 2024 siege and mass grave controversies merged with the further erosion of medical capacity in 2025, critically limiting access to healthcare services in the region.

Legal Debates

The events in Han Yunus and its surroundings in 1956, 2014, and 2024 have primarily triggered debates over violations of the principles of “distinction between civilians and armed forces” and “proportionality.” The high civilian death toll in a short time during 1956, narratives of indiscriminate firing during mass screenings, and subsequent emergency burials raised international questions about whether the use of force could be justified by military necessity. In 2014, the continued restriction of ambulance access even during ceasefire periods sparked debate over the failure to establish safe humanitarian corridors and the assignment of responsibility for foreseeable consequences.

In 2024, the mass graves discovered around the Nasser Medical Complex introduced a new dimension to legal discourse concerning the treatment of the dead, identification, and evidence preservation. Questions arose as to whether temporary burials within and adjacent to the campus were necessitated by emergency conditions or violated established procedures; whether records were deliberately destroyed, whether the level of body decomposition was consistent with neglect, and whether recovery procedures met standards. Reports of bodies with bound hands or stripped clothing brought forward allegations of mistreatment or execution at close range.

The protection of medical facilities has become a central legal issue since 2023, due to repeated disruptions and direct damage allegations. It has been reported that the effective disabling of hospitals—through fuel and electricity cuts, sieges, and access restrictions—constitutes a violation of protection norms. In response to possible claims of “military use,” debates have focused on whether adequate warnings, reasonable timeframes, and evacuation obligations were fulfilled. The cases of Nasser and European Gaza Hospitals have sharpened international disagreements over where to draw the line between protecting medical facilities and asserting military necessity.

In classifying possible offenses, the axes of “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” have come to the fore. The high civilian losses in 1956, the interruptions in humanitarian access in 2014, and the mass graves identified in 2024 have been evaluated as isolated acts or as part of a broader pattern. Questions have been raised regarding how to establish chains of command, policy or planning indicators, and evidentiary coherence; which jurisdictions—local, regional, or international—are most effective for accountability; and whether final classifications must be supported by comprehensive forensic analysis, spatial mapping, and consistent witness testimony.

Media and Archival Research

The memory of the 1956 events in Han Yunus has been preserved in an environment with limited official records, through testimonies, local commemorations, and municipal archives. Annual town ceremonies have focused on compiling names of the deceased and documenting family narratives in written and visual forms. The emergency burials carried out under curfews and mass deportations during the period made identification and accurate casualty counts difficult. Nevertheless, local documentation committees have worked to reconstruct names and kinship ties using family genealogies, neighborhood lists, and photographs. Humanitarian aid reports covering the period from 1 November to December 1956 have historically documented how food and movement restrictions created the conditions for the events, establishing an administrative backdrop that supports the narrative’s temporal–spatial framework.

Documentation of the 2014 Huzaa incident relied heavily on photo and video material produced on the ground. The restricted access for ambulances even during brief ceasefires, the local retrieval of bodies, and temporary covering practices were recorded by photojournalists. The narrow alleyway structure, transitions between fields and dwellings, and damaged roads directly shaped the composition and informational value of the footage. The images provided clues to reconstruct a chronological sequence of events: extraction from rubble, transport mechanisms, temporary assembly points, and burial preparations. Through these visuals, details that textual narratives alone could not convey—such as odor, difficulty breathing without masks, and the choice of covering materials—became perceptible.

In 2024, the mass graves uncovered around the Nasser Medical Complex extended documentation to the level of hospital campus procedures. During the siege, morgue and cold chain capacities collapsed; emergency temporary burials were conducted in courtyards and adjacent areas within the compound. After access was restored, civil defense and health teams matched excavation and recovery operations with photographic documentation, numbered body bags, sketches, and time–location notes. Severely decomposed bodies complicated identification; therefore, secondary data such as personal belongings, dental findings, and previous patient–visitor lists were cataloged. In some cases, allegations of binding and stripping were recorded through frame-by-frame analysis and documentation of incident site imagery. This holistic approach has laid the groundwork for subsequent forensic investigations into causes of death, timing of events, and potential chains of responsibility.

Media and documentation activities, despite increasing risks and restrictions since 2023, have been partially sustained. Security concerns associated with filming around hospitals and urban areas have restricted media teams’ mobility; however, photo and video streams produced on the ground have helped establish the chronology of civilian impact and infrastructure degradation. Particularly, damage records around Nasser and European Gaza Hospitals have made service and unit-level disruptions visible; turning points such as the partial shutdown on 27 February 2024 and the attack on 13 May 2025 have been consistently tracked in both written reports and visual sequences.

In terms of record management, due to the multi-scalar nature of the events (neighborhood, hospital campus, cemetery, transit points), disparate data streams have been integrated. Aid distribution schedules and referral logs have been cross-referenced with temporary burial sketches, excavation site photographs, and family applications. Record losses and infrastructure destruction created gaps; these have been partially filled using field notes and visual–spatial markers.