armed group / de facto authority

Hamas

An armed Islamist organization and de facto governing authority in Gaza, scored separately from Palestinian civilians and from the Palestinian Authority because it has distinct command responsibility, ideology, and documented abuses including attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. Hamas scores low because of coercive violence, documented human harm, and person-dependent governance, with weak worker power and poor loss-bearing fidelity reinforcing the negative evaluation.

Why this matters: Hamas is an anchor for non-state armed-group power: it is not a government chosen through accountable democratic control, but it exercises coercive authority and military violence.

Letter grade F Malignant Medium confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Last reviewed May 6, 2026

Final Score -60* F - Malignant

FMALIGNANT-60 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material3

Bonus+0

Cap35Ownership <= 2 and Governance <= 2

After Cap3

Penalties-63

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

F - Malignant

The score turns mainly on Governance, with the largest penalty coming from Coercive Violence.

Strengths

Governance1/10
Extraction1/10
Solidarity with the Unemployed1/7

Penalties

Coercive Violence-30
Human Harm-20
Reversibility-5
Identity Capture-3

Evidence state

ConfidenceMedium confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessExtensive (AI)
Linked claims13
Direct axis claims13
Coverage12/16

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	0 / 10	Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the… Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the politburo, with structures for Gaza, the West Bank, prisoners, and the diaspora. That keeps Hamas low on Ownership: decisive control remains with shareholders, private owners, executives, or state insiders rather than affected people. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 11 tied, 215 above on Ownership. Linked evidence context Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the politburo, with structures for Gaza, the West Bank, prisoners, and the diaspora. [1] context Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. [2]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	1 / 10	Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the… Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the politburo, with structures for Gaza, the West Bank, prisoners, and the diaspora. That keeps Hamas low on Governance: ordinary users, workers, customers, or affected communities cannot change the rules that govern them. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 2 scored entries below, 68 tied, 156 above on Governance. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the politburo, with structures for Gaza, the West Bank, prisoners, and the diaspora. [1] Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. [2]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	1 / 10	Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal… Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal and illicit funding sources while facing blocks from U.S. and EU aid because of terrorist designation. That keeps Hamas low on Extraction: the business model makes extraction from workers, users, suppliers, customers, or the public central rather than incidental. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 2 scored entries below, 17 tied, 207 above on Extraction. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal and illicit funding sources while facing blocks from U.S. and EU aid because of terrorist designation. [3] context CRS reports that Hamas has overseen a social welfare network that aided its popularity while also serving as a conduit for some military-operation funding; Freedom House reports that Hamas ran a large social-services network in Gaza under a broader system of civic constraints. [4]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	0 / 7	Freedom House reports that trade-union activity in Gaza was curtailed after Hamas took control, workers had little leverage in disputes, Hamas intervened in union elections or professional… Freedom House reports that trade-union activity in Gaza was curtailed after Hamas took control, workers had little leverage in disputes, Hamas intervened in union elections or professional associations linked to Fatah, and civic groups operated under Hamas-imposed constraints. That keeps Hamas low on Labor Sovereignty: labor remains managerially controlled, replaceable, or exposed to coercive employment and contracting conditions. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 0 tied, 226 above on Labor Sovereignty. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence Freedom House reports that trade-union activity in Gaza was curtailed after Hamas took control, workers had little leverage in disputes, Hamas intervened in union elections or professional associations linked to Fatah, and civic groups operated under Hamas-imposed constraints. [5] context Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. [2]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	1 / 7	CRS reports that Hamas has overseen a social welfare network that aided its popularity while also serving as a conduit for some military-operation funding; Freedom House reports that Hamas… CRS reports that Hamas has overseen a social welfare network that aided its popularity while also serving as a conduit for some military-operation funding; Freedom House reports that Hamas ran a large social-services network in Gaza under a broader system of civic constraints. That keeps Hamas low on Solidarity with the Unemployed: the model provides little protection for people who leave, are excluded, or cannot bargain from employment. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 3 scored entries below, 27 tied, 196 above on Solidarity with the Unemployed. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence CRS reports that Hamas has overseen a social welfare network that aided its popularity while also serving as a conduit for some military-operation funding; Freedom House reports that Hamas ran a large social-services network in Gaza under a broader system of civic constraints. [4] context Freedom House reports that trade-union activity in Gaza was curtailed after Hamas took control, workers had little leverage in disputes, Hamas intervened in union elections or professional associations linked to Fatah, and civic groups operated under Hamas-imposed constraints. [5]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	0 / 7	Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. That keeps Hamas low on Loss-Bearing Fidelity: losses, hazards, or adjustment costs are routinely pushed onto workers, customers, suppliers, communities, or the public. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 11 tied, 215 above on Loss-Bearing Fidelity. Linked evidence context Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. [6] context Freedom House reports that Hamas maintained a repressive ad hoc judicial system subject to political control, that Hamas security forces and militants carried out arbitrary arrests and detentions, and that due process generally failed in Hamas-overseen courts. [7]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	0 / 5	Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal… Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal and illicit funding sources while facing blocks from U.S. and EU aid because of terrorist designation. That keeps Hamas low on Market Conduct: market power, lock-in, coercive pricing, or exclusionary conduct is a major part of the institution's position. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 14 tied, 212 above on Market Conduct. Linked evidence context Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal and illicit funding sources while facing blocks from U.S. and EU aid because of terrorist designation. [3] context Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. [2]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	0 / 5	Freedom House reports that Hamas maintained a repressive ad hoc judicial system subject to political control, that Hamas security forces and militants carried out arbitrary arrests and detentions, and that due process generally failed in Hamas-overseen courts. Freedom House reports that Hamas maintained a repressive ad hoc judicial system subject to political control, that Hamas security forces and militants carried out arbitrary arrests and detentions, and that due process generally failed in Hamas-overseen courts. That keeps Hamas low on Product Integrity: the core offering is closely tied to harmful, addictive, deceptive, degrading, or low-integrity product design. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 4 tied, 222 above on Product Integrity. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence Freedom House reports that Hamas maintained a repressive ad hoc judicial system subject to political control, that Hamas security forces and militants carried out arbitrary arrests and detentions, and that due process generally failed in Hamas-overseen courts. [7] context CRS reports that Hamas has overseen a social welfare network that aided its popularity while also serving as a conduit for some military-operation funding; Freedom House reports that Hamas ran a large social-services network in Gaza under a broader system of civic constraints. [4]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	0 / 5	Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. That keeps Hamas low on Scale Integrity: scale magnifies harm, gatekeeping, opacity, or extraction rather than disciplining it. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 13 tied, 213 above on Scale Integrity. Linked evidence context Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza. [2] context Human Rights Watch reported war crimes and crimes against humanity by Hamas-led armed groups during the October 7 attacks, and U.S. counterterrorism materials identify Hamas as an armed terrorist organization. [8]

Penalties

Penalty	Applied	Why this penalty
Reversibility ? Applied when positive conduct depends on current living leaders, founders, family owners, or other person-contingent governance rather than durable structure. Range: -5 to 0.	-5	Any restraint by Hamas is discretionary because the organization lacks structural democratic accountability to affected civilians and targets. Any restraint by Hamas is discretionary because the organization lacks structural democratic accountability to affected civilians and targets. That warrants a severe Reversibility penalty because favorable conduct depends on current people or discretionary leadership rather than locked stakeholder structure. The value is near the floor because the conduct appears central, large-scale, repeated, or institutionally powerful rather than incidental. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 95 tied, 131 above on Reversibility. Linked evidence Any restraint by Hamas is discretionary because the organization lacks structural democratic accountability to affected civilians and targets. [9]
Human Harm ? Severity, scale, culpability, vulnerable targets, willful reoffense, reputation laundering, pattern escalation, and time decay. Range: -20 to 0.	-20	Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. That warrants a severe Human Harm penalty because ordinary operation, documented misconduct, or institutional power creates serious injury, deprivation, abuse, or foreseeable human damage. The value is near the floor because the conduct appears central, large-scale, repeated, or institutionally powerful rather than incidental. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 9 tied, 217 above on Human Harm. Linked evidence Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. [6]
Coercive Violence ? Direct or institutionally enabled killing, torture, detention abuse, armed repression, forced displacement, violent domination, or nonconsensual crisis-line emergency escalation that exposes callers to confinement or force. Range: -30 to 0.	-30	Human Rights Watch reported war crimes and crimes against humanity by Hamas-led armed groups during the October 7 attacks, and U.S. counterterrorism materials identify Hamas as an armed terrorist organization. Human Rights Watch reported war crimes and crimes against humanity by Hamas-led armed groups during the October 7 attacks, and U.S. counterterrorism materials identify Hamas as an armed terrorist organization. That warrants a severe Coercive Violence penalty because the institution uses, enables, profits from, or materially supports violent domination, detention abuse, war, or armed coercion. The value is near the floor because the conduct appears central, large-scale, repeated, or institutionally powerful rather than incidental. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 2 tied, 224 above on Coercive Violence. Linked evidence Human Rights Watch reported war crimes and crimes against humanity by Hamas-led armed groups during the October 7 attacks, and U.S. counterterrorism materials identify Hamas as an armed terrorist organization. [8]
Accountability Opacity ? Material opacity, reputation laundering, or hidden accountability structures that prevent public accountability. Range: -2 to 0.	-2	Hamas’s armed command structure, security control, and lack of democratic accountability create extreme public-accountability opacity. Hamas’s armed command structure, security control, and lack of democratic accountability create extreme public-accountability opacity. That warrants a severe Accountability Opacity penalty because material facts, risks, conflicts, ownership, or accountability information are obscured from the public. The value is near the floor because the conduct appears central, large-scale, repeated, or institutionally powerful rather than incidental. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 52 tied, 174 above on Accountability Opacity. Linked evidence Hamas’s armed command structure, security control, and lack of democratic accountability create extreme public-accountability opacity. [10]
Identity Capture ? Customer pressure, employee pressure, and pervasive identity saturation. Range: -3 to 0.	-3	Hamas’s governing and armed authority relies on coercive ideology, armed loyalty, and suppression of political alternatives in Gaza. Hamas’s governing and armed authority relies on coercive ideology, armed loyalty, and suppression of political alternatives in Gaza. That warrants a severe Identity Capture penalty because users, workers, customers, or publics are pressured into identity attachment that protects institutional power. The value is near the floor because the conduct appears central, large-scale, repeated, or institutionally powerful rather than incidental. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 12 tied, 214 above on Identity Capture. Linked evidence Hamas’s governing and armed authority relies on coercive ideology, armed loyalty, and suppression of political alternatives in Gaza. [11]
Surveillance Capture ? Invasive surveillance, unreasonably non-optional tracking, facial recognition, biometric identification, or AI behavior scanning of customers, workers, bystanders, or the public. Range: -5 to 0.	-2	Freedom House reports severe political-rights and civil-liberties deficits in Gaza, where Hamas exercises coercive internal control over civic and political life. Freedom House reports severe political-rights and civil-liberties deficits in Gaza, where Hamas exercises coercive internal control over civic and political life. That warrants a substantial Surveillance Capture penalty because customers, workers, users, bystanders, or the public are exposed to invasive tracking, biometrics, or behavior scanning. The value is substantial but not at the floor because the linked record shows serious conduct without the strongest aggravating factors on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 30 scored entries below, 4 tied, 192 above on Surveillance Capture. Linked evidence Freedom House reports severe political-rights and civil-liberties deficits in Gaza, where Hamas exercises coercive internal control over civic and political life. [12]
Ideological Disavowal ? Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.	-1	Hamas's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Hamas shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest,… Hamas's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Hamas shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest, professional, market, safety, or institutional language, but the record does not show dominant concealment of standpoint. That warrants a limited Ideological Disavowal penalty because the institution presents situated, contested choices as neutrality, expertise, inevitability, safety, or common sense. The value is limited because the linked record shows a real problem but not one that dominates the profile on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Ideological Disavowal 0 to -3 recalibration: 0 for explicit standpoint or no penalty-level neutrality theater; -1 for bounded softening of contested choices; -2 for strong neutrality theater by a powerful institution; -3 for major gatekeeping or coercive power presented as neutral, necessary, objective, or non-ideological. Uncertainty This recalibration uses public self-presentation and profile evidence; later review should add direct language-analysis evidence for high-impact institutions. Linked evidence Hamas's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Hamas shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest, professional, market, safety, or institutional language, but the record does not show dominant concealment of standpoint. [13]

Bonus Credits

No bonus credits applied in this version.

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

Medium 77/100

13 verified linked claims 13 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 12/16 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 18/20

13 verified linked claims

Source quality 13/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 9/18

13 direct claims across 16 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 8/10

12/16 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceMedium confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessExtensive (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1Congressional Research Service describes Hamas as having a formal leadership structure with a 15-member politburo as the primary decisionmaking entity and a Shura Council that elects the politburo, with structures for Gaza, the West Bank, prisoners, and the diaspora.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

CRS: Hamas: Background, Current Status, and U.S. PolicyOfficial self-description · 68%

2Freedom House reports that Hamas continued to govern Gaza unilaterally and in an authoritarian manner without an electoral mandate; CFR describes Hamas as establishing separate political, military, and legal institutions after taking control of Gaza.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%
Council on Foreign Relations: Who Governs the Palestinians?General web source · 58%

3Washington Institute describes Hamas’s prewar apparatus as including many ministries and says remaining bodies have focused on price controls and collecting taxes; CFR notes Hamas has legal and illicit funding sources while facing blocks from U.S. and EU aid because of terrorist designation.

Extraction Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Washington Institute: Countering Hamas’s Shadow Governance in GazaGeneral web source · 58%
Council on Foreign Relations: Who Governs the Palestinians?General web source · 58%

5Freedom House reports that trade-union activity in Gaza was curtailed after Hamas took control, workers had little leverage in disputes, Hamas intervened in union elections or professional associations linked to Fatah, and civic groups operated under Hamas-imposed constraints.

Labor Sovereignty Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%

6Human Rights Watch reported that Hamas-led armed groups committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity during the October 7, 2023 attacks, including deliberate attacks on civilians and hostage-taking.

Human Harm Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Human Rights Watch: Hamas-led October 7 attacks reportGeneral web source · 58%

7Freedom House reports that Hamas maintained a repressive ad hoc judicial system subject to political control, that Hamas security forces and militants carried out arbitrary arrests and detentions, and that due process generally failed in Hamas-overseen courts.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%

8Human Rights Watch reported war crimes and crimes against humanity by Hamas-led armed groups during the October 7 attacks, and U.S. counterterrorism materials identify Hamas as an armed terrorist organization.

Coercive Violence Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Human Rights Watch: Hamas-led October 7 attacks reportGeneral web source · 58%
NCTC: HamasPrimary public record · 100%

9Any restraint by Hamas is discretionary because the organization lacks structural democratic accountability to affected civilians and targets.

Reversibility Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%
NCTC: HamasPrimary public record · 100%

10Hamas’s armed command structure, security control, and lack of democratic accountability create extreme public-accountability opacity.

Accountability Opacity Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%
NCTC: HamasPrimary public record · 100%

11Hamas’s governing and armed authority relies on coercive ideology, armed loyalty, and suppression of political alternatives in Gaza.

Identity Capture Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%

12Freedom House reports severe political-rights and civil-liberties deficits in Gaza, where Hamas exercises coercive internal control over civic and political life.

Surveillance Capture Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%

13Hamas's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Hamas shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest, professional, market, safety, or institutional language, but the record does not show dominant concealment of standpoint.

Ideological Disavowal Verified Medium confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 9, 2026

AI scaffold

Hamas official sitePrimary public record · 100%
Human Rights Watch: Hamas-led October 7 attacks reportGeneral web source · 58%
Freedom House: Gaza Strip, Freedom in the World 2025General web source · 58%

Alternatives

AGOOD51 Republic of Finland government · Finland

Competitors

FMALIGNANT-19 Palestinian Authority government / limited self-government authority · same market FMALIGNANT-52 State of Israel government government · same market FMALIGNANT-70 Israel Defense Forces military · same market AGOOD51 Republic of Finland government · Finland CPERFORMATIVE37 Kingdom of Norway government · Norway DEXTRACTIVE27 Federal Student Aid U.S. Department of Education student-aid office · United States DEXTRACTIVE23 United Nations intergovernmental organization · Global FMALIGNANT-17 United States federal government government · United States

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Hamas Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

May 7, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC ai-scaffolding score-calibration

Replaced Hamas placeholder all-zero material-axis evaluation with specific source-backed governance, social-services, taxation, labor, and rule-of-law evidence; recalibrated material axes from all-zero to a narrowly nonzero profile where evidence supports it.

May 6, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC ai-scaffolding

View Full Audit Log