Amnesty: Pakistan’s March Strike on Kabul Rehab Center Should Be Investigated as Possible War Crime

Amnesty International said Tuesday that Pakistan’s March 16 airstrike on Kabul’s Omid drug rehabilitation center, which the United Nations has said killed at least 269 civilians, should be investigated as a possible war crime.

In a detailed investigation published July 21, the rights group said it found no evidence to support Pakistan’s public claim that the site was an ammunition depot or other military facility. Amnesty said the available evidence instead pointed to a large civilian medical center that had been operating for years.

The strike hit the Omid Addiction Treatment Hospital, also described as the Omid Rehabilitation and Treatment Centre, at about 9 p.m. local time on March 16. The facility is on the former Camp Phoenix site in Kabul’s PD-9 area, next to Ibn-e-Sina Hospital.

The U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, or UNAMA, said the airstrike was carried out by Pakistan military forces and struck “the Omid Addiction Treatment Hospital, a healthcare facility for the treatment of drug-addicted individuals.” UNAMA verified that at least 269 civilians were killed and at least 122 were injured, and said the true toll could be higher. It described the Omid strike as the deadliest single incident in its January-to-March 2026 documentation of cross-border civilian casualties in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has said the March strikes were part of “Operation Ghazab Lil-Haq,” which it framed as a counterterrorism campaign amid escalating cross-border tensions involving Pakistan and Afghan territory and actors in late 2025 and early 2026. Pakistani officials have said they did not target a hospital.

Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said Pakistan had “targeted technical support infrastructure and ammunition storage facilities” at two Kabul locations and that “the visible secondary detonations after the strikes clearly indicate the presence of large ammunition depots.” Pakistan has publicly maintained that precision-guided weapons were used.

Amnesty disputed that account. The group said it reviewed more than 60 photos and videos, more than 30 satellite images, and conducted 11 interviews with staff, former staff, witnesses and family members. It said weapons experts identified at least one munition used in the attack as a Takbir precision-guided bomb, which Amnesty said was consistent with Pakistan’s statement that guided weapons were used.

But Amnesty said it found no evidence that the struck parts of the Omid compound were being used to store weapons or ammunition. It also said the footage it reviewed did not clearly show the secondary detonations that Pakistani officials cited as proof of munitions storage.

According to Amnesty, at least three parts of the compound were heavily damaged, including a large eastern hangar and dormitory area where most bodies were recovered. Interviewees told the group that more than 1,000 patients were at the center that night. Amnesty said the strike came as Tarawih prayers were ending during Ramadan, a time when many civilians were present.

“The attack on the Omid Centre constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law — possibly amounting to a war crime,” Isabelle Lassee of Amnesty International said in the report. “Given the widely available information that the site had been used as a medical facility for more than a decade, this reflects a major failure in military planning by Pakistan that led to a significant loss of civilian life.”

Under international humanitarian law, hospitals and other medical units are protected from attack unless they are being used for military purposes. The Rome Statute, the treaty that established the International Criminal Court, lists intentionally directing attacks against hospitals that are not military objectives as a war crime.

Amnesty called for a prompt, independent and impartial investigation. It said it contacted Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on July 9 seeking details of any internal investigation and any evidence supporting Pakistan’s claim about the site, but had received no response by the time it published its findings.

Amnesty’s assessment adds to earlier scrutiny of the strike. Human Rights Watch said on March 27 that the attack was unlawful and a possible war crime. Other reporting, including an April investigation by The New York Times, also concluded that the site appeared to be a civilian rehabilitation facility rather than a munitions depot.