Plans by Donald Trump's 'Board of Peace' for Gaza have sparked alarm after documents revealed the organisation is seeking sweeping legal immunity and the ability to seize public property without cost. A draft resolution, obtained by The Guardian, proposes granting immunity from arrest, detention or prosecution in Gaza courts to its members, affiliates and contractors, as well as international military forces.
The four-page document, dated June 2026, defines the scope of this immunity, stating it would apply to 'any legal proceedings in the courts or other entities in Gaza', although it remains unclear whether this protection would extend to international courts. The draft resolution also suggests that the Board of Peace's chair, Donald Trump, would have authority to waive an individual's immunity with majority support from the seven-member executive board.
The proposed governing body, which has not yet secured major financial commitments or contracts, includes prominent figures such as Jared Kushner and Marco Rubio. While several countries have pledged aid, most have not transferred funds, fuelling concerns about accountability and transparency in the Board's operations. Critics argue that this immunity would undermine efforts to hold individuals accountable for incidents affecting Gaza residents.
Legal experts have voiced concern over the ambiguity of how officials, soldiers and contractors would be held to account under such a framework. The parallels with past US-led reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, which faced controversies over corruption and civilian casualties involving contractors, are striking. The UK Government's continued support for humanitarian aid in Gaza is at odds with its lack of engagement on the proposed Board of Peace's operational framework.
The Board of Peace has responded to inquiries, insisting that it would ensure all personnel adhere to applicable law and operate under clear rules, oversight and accountability mechanisms. However, specifics on these mechanisms have not been provided, fuelling concerns about the proposed governing body's transparency and commitment to accountability. The draft resolution has sparked calls for greater scrutiny and clarification from international partners, including the UK.