On Hamas and The Laws of War...

This is the key Article in the Geneva Convention for the conflict between Israel and Hamas:

It is Article 28:

The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.

Violation of this is a war crime.

Period.

The Swedish Diakonia says this:

The use of civilians to protect the military is an illegal method of warfare misusing their vulnerability and protected status by forcing them to take part in the hostilities. The involvement of civilians puts them under jeopardy and in fact strips them of their protection.

Hence Hamas is engaging deliberately and with full knowledge illegal methods of warfare, i.e. war crimes.

How so?

This:

GC 1 Art. 50.

Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.

Hamas is willfully causing great suffering, extensive destruction not justified by military necessity, carried out unlawfully and wantonly. By deliberately using the presence of civilians - i.e. protected persons - to attempt to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, they are the ones committing the war crimes.

Still not convinced?

See this:

AP 1 Article 85 - Repression of breaches of this Protocol

[...]

3. In addition to the grave breaches defined in Article 11, the following acts shall be regarded as grave breaches of this Protocol, when committed wilfully, in violation of the relevant provisions of this Protocol, and causing death or serious injury to body or health:

(a) making the civilian population or individual civilians the object of attack;

(b) launching an indiscriminate attack affecting the civilian population or civilian objects in the knowledge that such attack will cause excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects, as defined in Article 57, paragraph 2 (a)(iii);

(c) launching an attack against works or installations containing dangerous forces in the knowledge that such attack will cause excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects, as defined in Article 57, paragraph 2 (a)(iii);

(d) making non-defended localities and demilitarized zones the object of attack;

(e) making a person the object of attack in the knowledge that he is hors de combat;

(f) the perfidious use, in violation of Article 37, of the distinctive emblem of the red cross, red crescent or red lion and sun or of other protective signs recognized by the Conventions or this Protocol.

[...]

4. In addition to the grave breaches defined in the preceding paragraphs and in the Conventions, the following shall be regarded as grave breaches of this Protocol, when committed wilfully and in violation of the Conventions or the Protocol:

[...]

(d) making the clearly-recognized historic monuments, works of art or places of worship which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples and to which special protection has been given by special arrangement, for example, within the framework of a competent international organization, the object of attack, causing as a result extensive destruction thereof, where there is no evidence of the violation by the adverse Party of Article 53, subparagraph (b), and when such historic monuments, works of art and places of worship are not located in the immediate proximity of military objectives;

In other words, by hiding amongst the civilian population, by firing their rockets towards Israel with the deliberate aim of causing civilian causalties, by making civilians targets, by using mosques as weapons dumps and to house combatants, Hamas is committing war crimes.

The last point - 4 (d) - looks to be the weakest of the arguments, but for that critical point: where there is no evidence of the violation or abuse of these areas. Given the way secondary explosions have occurred, that appears not to be the case.

The ones in this current conflict who need to worry about violating the Laws of Warfare as laid out in the Geneva Conventions are Hamas. Israel obeys these rules. Hamas does not.