The UN is a forum for diplomacy to happen in nothing more. It is not the world's government and when it moves in that direction it's always a shit show. The US Electoral College is complete bullshit, but the UN is far far worse than that. One country one vote is never going to lead to an organization that represents the world because most of the world's government's are authoritarian.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/current-members

The UN Human Rights Commission has countries on them that are the worst human rights abusers in the world. This is good from a diplomatic perspective as it could encourage those countries to do better. But it's also bad because those human rights abusers will put out reports to claim their enemies are doing bad things to give themselves cover. Qatar has slavery, and was a supporter of Hamas (and maybe still is unofficial), and they're a member of the UN Human Rights commission. The UN commissions have a nasty habit of not recusing themselves when there's a conflict of interest, so Qatar would have some influence here.

Ethiopia is also of the member. The conflict in Ethiopia is ten times worse than anything you see happening in Gaza. But it's like the line from Lord of War... "there was a white war happening so nobody gave a shit about what was happening in Africa." Ethiopia has an interest in keeping everyone's eyes on Gaza.

Same goes for the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The UN is just kinda a fucked up group dominated by authoritarian human rights abusers, they should be treated with some skepticism on anything they say about the subject.

Your link the to Red Cross has this right at the top:

N.B. As per the disclaimer, neither the ICRC nor the authors can be identified with the opinions expressed in the Cases and Documents. Some cases even come to solutions that clearly violate IHL. They are nevertheless worthy of discussion, if only to raise a challenge to display more humanity in armed conflicts. Similarly, in some of the texts used in the case studies, the facts may not always be proven; nevertheless, they have been selected because they highlight interesting IHL issues and are thus published for didactic purposes.

So they admit they don't know what they're talking about and and having "discussion". Basically just shit talking in the general direction of Israel.