As I read the Rome Statute, it is less about the ratio of civilians killed to terrorists, but the intention and the "value of the target". So, if the estimate was that 20 civilians might be harmed and instead 100 were, the relevant number is 20 innocent people.

This becomes quite problematic when dealing with drone and rocket attacks. Where it can be hard to estimate who will die. The US was accused of violating these rules repeatedly with its drone attacks in the Middle East and Afghanistan.

When dealing with guerillas and terrorists, the classification of combatant and noncombatant becomes blurred. Civilians have an obligation to try to avoid proximity to combatants. Sometimes, they are domestic hostages used as shields, other times they complicit.

Moreover the value of the target is more important than the target to civilian ratio, if the "target" is a leader capable of ordering hundreds of Israeli citizens to die from terrorist attacks than elimination of that leader must be measured against the future innocent lives saved.

So, the proportionality concept is complex and does not directly translate into actual body counts.

In contrast, given the events of October 7, it seems the UN would begin by investigating the Palestinians, since it seems civilians were the primary targets.

With Israel, the protocol should be that Israel, not the UN is asked to investigate the event. Only if it refuses, does the UN have the authority to investigate. And the evidence must show, that after considering all variables including potential future victims of the targeted individuals, that the number of noncombatants killed was not "justified" .

In this instance, if the targeted individual was in fact a key planner behind October 7th, I do not think Israel violated the Rome statutes.

If the person was simply a member of Hamas of no importance, then they probably did. My bet Israel knew exactly who this person was and why it was worth the "price" to take him out.