Under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), the distinction between incidental loss and intentional targeting relies on the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution. To determine legality, legal bodies examine the intent of the attacker and the nature of the military objective.
Intentional targeting occurs if an attack is directed specifically at civilians or civilian objects, such as holiday camps, without a valid military objective. If a facility is used for military purposes, it may become a legitimate target, but the attack must still comply with the principle of proportionality. This principle prohibits attacks where the expected incidental harm to civilians is excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
Incidental loss of life is characterized as collateral damage that occurs during a lawful strike on a legitimate military objective. For a strike to be lawful, commanders must take all feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm. If a strike hits a dual use site, investigators look at whether the military advantage was significant enough to justify the civilian risk and whether the attacker took steps to verify the target and mitigate unintended damage.
