Gaza Strip
A major terrorist attack by Hamas on Israeli territory in October 2023 triggered a massive Israeli military response in Gaza, resulting in thousands of deaths, the internal displacement of nearly the entire civilian population, an escalating humanitarian crisis, and an unprecedented level of damage to physical infrastructure.
Research & Recommendations
Gaza Strip*
| PR Political Rights | -2 40 |
| CL Civil Liberties | 4 60 |
Overview
The political rights and civil liberties of Gaza Strip residents are severely constrained or denied. The Palestinian political and militant group known as Hamas, or the Islamic Resistance Movement, gained control of the Gaza Strip in 2007, following its victory in the preceding year’s Palestinian legislative elections and a subsequent conflict with Fatah, the ruling party in the West Bank. The entrenched division between Hamas and the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority (PA) since then has contributed to the repeated postponement of elections, which have not been held in the Gaza Strip since 2006. Hamas—which has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union, and other democracies—governs the territory under its control in an authoritarian manner, actively suppressing criticism of its rule. Since 2007, Israel’s de facto blockade of the territory, periodic military incursions, and rule-of-law violations have imposed serious hardship on the civilian population, as has Egypt’s tight control over the southern border. After Hamas forces killed some 1,200 Israelis and took more than 250 hostages in the most devastating terrorist attack on Israeli territory in October 2023, Israel responded with a military campaign in Gaza that killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and deprived the civilian population of access to adequate water, food, medical care, and shelter. An October 2025 ceasefire left Hamas in de facto control of less than half of the Gaza Strip, with Israeli forces occupying the remainder.
Democratic resilience will increasingly depend on stronger coordination among countries that share a commitment to freedom, the rule of law, and accountable governance.
International support for democratic institutions, civil society, and independent media has been associated with modest but meaningful improvements in democratic governance, and it is far less costly than the military outlays necessitated by rising authoritarian aggression.
Young people are increasingly dissatisfied with democracy—not because they reject its principles, but because they see institutions failing to deliver on them. Programmatic work should create clear pathways for meaningful political participation, from voting and policy engagement to community organizing and public leadership, so that young people can translate their expectations into agency.
News and Updates
Featured
Freedom House Perspectives
News Releases & Media Coverage
Country Facts
Basic Facts
Internet Facts
Election Facts
Transnational Repression
NOTE: Freedom in the World reports assess the level of political rights and civil liberties in a given geographical area, regardless of whether they are affected by the state, nonstate actors, or foreign powers. Disputed or occupied territories are sometimes assessed separately if they meet certain criteria, including boundaries that are sufficiently stable to allow year-on-year comparisons. For more information, see the report methodology and FAQ.