A/HRC/40/74 children who do not take part in hostilities. The commission found that the Israeli security forces shot paramedics, journalists and children who had not lost their protected status; Israel is thus in violation of international humanitarian law. 104. Some members of the higher national committee, including Hamas, encouraged or defended demonstrators’ use of incendiary kites and balloons, causing fear and significant damage in southern Israel. The de facto authorities in Gaza failed in their due diligence obligations to prevent and stop the use of these indiscriminate devices. 105. The commission found that, on 14 May, at least one gunman fired a weapon at the Israeli forces from within or near the demonstrations at a temporary demonstration site in North Gaza. Firing from the vicinity of a crowd of unarmed demonstrators endangers civilian lives and risks violating the principle of distinction under international humanitarian law. X. Accountability 106. Violations of international law, such as those committed by the Israeli security forces and set out in the present report, give rise to State responsibility on the part of the State of Israel. Israel has an obligation to investigate alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian by its security forces and, where appropriate, to prosecute those deemed responsible. Victims of human rights violations are entitled to remedies, including equal and effective access to justice and adequate, effective and prompt reparation, including compensation, and guarantees of non-repetition. 107. The commission found that responsibility for unlawful deaths and injuries lay primarily on two fronts. First, those who employed lethal force, assisted with or authorized it to be deployed in specific instances, in the absence of an imminent threat to life or where the victim was not directly participating in hostilities; this includes snipers, spotters and/or commanders on site. Second, those who drafted and approved the rules of engagement. While the Supreme Court of Israel approved the rules, the commission has significant concerns about the status of “main inciters”, which does not exist in international law; indeed, its use undermined the threshold of “imminent threat to life” for the use of potentially lethal force. Significantly, the Or Commission of Inquiry established by Israel in 2003 determined that “it should be made unequivocally clear that firing live ammunition, including sniper fire, is not a means to disperse crowds… This is a means to be used only in special circumstances, such as when there is a real and immediate threat to life…”. 108. While some deaths may have been examined by the Israel Defense Forces’ internal “fact-finding assessment”, criminal investigations were opened in only five cases, including the deaths of four children. The commission’s findings suggest strongly that other killings and gunshot injuries appeared factually similar and therefore also warrant criminal investigation. 109. The police force of the de facto authorities in Gaza bears responsibility for failing to take adequate measures to prevent incendiary kites and balloons from reaching Israel, spreading fear among civilians in Israel and inflicting damage on parks, fields and property. Similarly, the police force failed to prevent or take action against those demonstrators who injured Israeli soldiers. 110. The commission was given a mandate to identify those it deemed responsible for the violations it refers to in the present report. It will place the relevant information in a confidential file to be handed over to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The commission will authorize the High Commissioner to provide access to that information to the International Criminal Court and national authorities conducting credible investigations for the purposes of ensuring accountability for crimes and other serious violations committed, establishing the truth about violations or implementing United Nations-mandated targeted sanctions against particular individuals or institutions. The commission will request the High Commissioner to grant access only to the extent that witnesses or other sources of information concerned have given their informed consent and that any protection concerns are duly addressed. 20