model united nation study guide

8/19/2019 Model United Nation Study Guide

1/19

GENERAL ASSEMBLY: THIRD COMMITTEE

SOCIAL HUM ANITARIAN AND CULTRUAL

“

PROTE TION OF REPORTERS IN

ONFLI T ZONES

”


2/19

Greetings,

It is with great excitement that I welcome you to the Committee. My name is Magdalene

Victoria, a sophomore majoring in law at Universitas Indonesia. A little about me: I have

always been exposed to international matters since the age of fifteen and I intend to continuethis passion throughout college. Upon entering university, I became one of UI’s

representative individuals to The European International MUN (TEIMUN) 2014 at the

Hague, Netherlands and appointed Head of the UI delegation for 2015. I also had the

opportunity to chair several MUNs—Jakarta MUN and Indonesia MUN are among them. I

recently had the privilege of representing Indonesia in Hong Kong for the 13th Red Cross

International Moot Court Competition until the semi-finals, after having represented UI at a

national level alongside a team of three law students.

On a lighter note I am a humanitarian activist; previous Vice President of UI MUN Club

General Assembly; BEM FH Departement Keilmuan & Pendidikan; and an active member ofFH International Moot Court Society. Many have express to measure their ability in MUN

through awards however mine is to teach. Therefore I hope to see a debate full of bright and

enthusiastic participants who takes risks to a certain conviction.

Sincerely,

Magdalene Victoria

Chair $% the Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Affairs Committee.


3/19

Hi delegates,

First of all let me welcome you guys to the ALSA 19th E-Comp Model United Nations 2015!

I’m Zaslyn Annisa and it’s my privilege to serve as one of the group administrator known as

dais for Social, Humanitarian and cultural council and I am looking forward to work with you

in the conference.

I am actually a freshmen on my 2nd term that majoring law on the University of Indonesia.

My interest upon Model United Nation was firstly develop when I was in Senior High Schoolattending my very first ALSA E-Comp. Though it didn’t turned out as splendid as I expected,

that doesn’t automatically deprive my interest in those field up until now, because I personally believe that losing something doesn’t necessary means that you are the loser, it all

depends on your attitude towards the circumstances.

This year Social, Humanitarian and cultural council on ALSA E-COMP MUN 2015 offers

captivating topic to create possible endeavors that countenance the safety of journalists,

which lately has been the hottest issue around the globe. Therefore, I am so excited to see

heated debate session consist of fresh ideas and concrete arguments and of course the final

resolution from all of your brilliant mind at the end of the conference. I do believe that all of

you will have the time of your life in the conference room, and we’ll see each other very

soon. May the odds be ever in your favor, delegates!

Sincerely,

Zasslyn Annisa

Dais $% the Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Affairs Committee.


4/19

Greeting delegates,

Its is with great honor that i welcome you the committe of SOCHUM. My name is Rafif

Muhammad Rizqullah, a senior in Faculty of law Universitas Padadjaran. I have also been a

person who are keen to in pursue of knowledge and has been exposed towards the

International society since i was born. Born in Australia envisioned me with a lot of different

perspective of seeing people with diffrent country and perspective and this makes me the

person i am right now.

I have always been an active person in order to seek more knowledge on the perspective of

people and the pursue of knowledge itself, by highschool itself i have become the Indonesian

delegatefor east-west centre program to washington, a captain of the debate team, and the

national winner of the National Economic debate.

My extensive way of journey continues in highschool where i am trusted as the indonesian

delegates for the manfred lachs moot court competition in the asia pacific roun and followed

by my experience as the Universitas Padjadjaran delegates for the Harvard National Model

United Nations 2014, serving in the legal comittee.

I am thrill to see you in the committee to stimulate the pursue of knowledge through the issue

aperehend through an exensive of solutive debate.

Sincerely,

Rafif Muhammad Rizqullah

Dais $% the Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Affairs Committee


5/19

History of the Committee

After the League of Nations’ failure in arbitrating the conflicts that led up to World

War II, the United Nations was established and sets the principles for internationalcollaboration in maintaining peace and security.1 All members of the United Nations

are represented in the General Assembly, which closely resembles a world parliament,

and are expected to meet on a regular basis. Each country, large or small, rich or poor,

has a single vote. None of the decisions taken by the Assembly however, are binding.

Nevertheless, the Assembly's decisions become a resolution that carries the weight of

governments around the world.

The General Assembly decides on issues of international peace and security. Due to

the great number of questions called upon to consider, the Assembly allocates items

relevant to its work among its six Main Committees. One of them is the ThirdCommittee: The Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Affairs Committee (SOCHUM).

SOCHUM is tasked with a broad mandate surrounding social, humanitarian and

human rights issues from around the globe. Since the General Assembly often deals

with human rights matter, therefore Resolutions and Conventions related to such topic

is negotiated by this committee.2

SOCHUM is simultaneously in session with the General Assembly. The Assembly

allocates issues in accordance with the follow up questions that arise during its

previous sessions relating to (i) the advancement of women; (ii) the protection ofchildren, indigenous issues; (iii) the treatment of refugees; (iv) the promotion of

fundamental freedoms through the elimination of racism and racial discrimination;

and (v) the right to self-determination.3

One mandate of this Committee is the ability to compose draft resolutions which will

be introduced and presented to the General Assembly, subject to the adoption of the

resolution. The sixty-eighth session of GA marks over 70 Draft Resolutions being

considered. Half of which, were submitted under the human rights agenda alone.

This year’s topic of Protection of Journalists in Conflict Zones signifies the risk journalists had to withstand to seek a coverage of areas in times of conflict.

" )*+, *+-./ 0$11-22,,34 +2256778889+:1;9?+7,2;7:2 "C4

#D""E# !"#$% & &'(#)*+ -./)0#1)2#)0 3 4.*1.2)* 4 ) *+-./ 0$11-22,,3 +2256778889:


6/19

Topic Area: The Protection of Journalists in Conflict Zones

The years of 2011 and 2012 were among the horriyfying years for journalists

reporting from conflict situations worldwide. The number of assaults, arrests andattacks have been on a constant rise and portray ad ramatic image of the journalistic

profession. In light of the increasing threats in armed conflicts, being a war reporter

has become an inherently dangerous task. Journalist are not only at risk of becoming

so-called collateral damage during millitary operations, they are also increasingly

targeted. Their role as a watchdog and witness to the horrors of war, in addition to the

undeniable power of the word and image they spread, has made them a popular

targets. It is therefore essential that the international community reevaluate journalist

de jure and de facto protections in armed conflicts to allow for better safeguards and

consequently less casualties in the imminent future.

This article examines the current protections afforded to journalists and aims at

detecting proposals for enhanced safeguards that are most likely to eeffectively

improve journalist safety in the field. In this regard to this article will argue that the

legal protections are in fact sufficient and hardly amendable and that therefore, a more

practical, hands on approach to implementation of those protections must be the focus

of future actions. This goal can only be achieved by a comprehensive mission jointly

pursued by governments, millitaries, journalists, media , NGOs and society.

Current Status Of Journalists in Conflict Zones

The Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Barometer proves that countries

involved in violent conflict are dangerous places for media professionals – with 37

journalists killed in Iraq since the beginning of 2006, 3 in Sri Lanka and Colombia, 2

in Afghanistan. But also the figures from countries like Mexico (7 deaths), Russia (3)

the Philippines (2) and China (2) show that the lives of journalists are threatened even

in states that do not have discernible war zones.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) recently published details about 580

journalists that were killed in the line of duty worldwide between January 1992 and

August 2006. According to these data, 71,4% were murdered, 18,4% died in crossfire

or in combat-related circumstances and 10% during other dangerous assignments.

Print reporters face the greatest risk of death, except in few parts of the world like the

Philippines and India where radio journalists and TV reporters have a higher risk of

being killed.

Status of journalists and war correspondents in case of conflict

“Journalist deaths typically spike in times of war, from about 26 in years without

major conflict to roughly 46 in years of significant warfare. Several of the


7/19

deadliest countries for journalists – Iraq, Algeria, Colombia, and Bosnia, for

example – reflect the wars that have endangered all citizens.”

In times of violent conflict, the dangers journalists are exposed to are more imminent

than in ordinary times. Independent, precise and professional information is

particularly vital under these circumstances. 137 journalists and media staff have been

killed since the beginning of the Iraq war, which is the deadliest conflict for media

professionals since the Second World War. Recent conflicts in Lebanon or in Somalia

have shown that, once more, journalists working in conflict zones are particularly

vulnerable, despite the fact that “attacks against journalists and media equipment are

illegal under international humanitarian law, which protects civilian persons and

objects, as long as they are not making an effective contribution to military action.”

Even though media professionals working in conflict zones have the status of

civilians, this status and thus international humanitarian law is less and less respected by some belligerents. According to the analysis carried out by CPJ, journalists

working in war zones (especially local reporters) are usually not killed by an errant

bullet. In fact, they are usually murdered. Crossfire in combat is just the second-

leading cause of deaths, although it is the major cause of international journalists’

deaths.

Since journalists and war correspondents covering conflicts do not receive a full

safety guarantee by the belligerents, it is the responsibility of the media institution

that sends them into conflict zones to limit the risks and to provide protection, basic

guaranties and, if necessary, compensation – no matter if they are salaried or

freelancers, local or international journalists. Protection should in no case constitute

an embedding by military forces – as it was the case during the Iraq war – or by

governmental authorities. Instead, military forces should be informed about the rights

of journalists in conflict zones. “In 2005, CPJ and Human Rights Watch urged U.S.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to take basic steps to improve safety at military

checkpoints in Iraq. The recommendations, many echoed by rank-and-file military

officials, called for the use of non-lethal measures such as spike strips to disable

vehicles; the use of international symbols to warn drivers; and the use of warning

lights. Military forces must be willing to investigate journalist killings, even whenthey are unintentional.”

War reporting is inherently dangerous. Indeed, it could arguably be one of the

most dangerous occupations in the world. Still, out of sense of professional duty,

many journalists and media professional[s] make the courageous choice to go to

conflict zones, so as to tell the world about the stories of armed conflicts and the

human cost they entail. Amidst the so-called ‘fog of war’, they play a vital role in

keeping the world informed and ensuring that our responses are based on the facts


8/19

and truths unfolding on the ground.4

This statement accurately illustrates that in times of armed conflict, be it international

or non-international, the media’s surveillance role and their importance in informing

the population are enhanced.

5

This is mainly due to the fact that during war,

6

afunctioning civil society that critically monitors the behaviour of the government and

military is often absent.7 The media is the main, if not the sole, transmitter of

information on breaches of international security8 and the primary medium through

which people gain a clear picture of a (distant) situation.9 This essential role makes

the media one of the most powerful tools in waging war. As NewsWatch Canada’s

Co-Director Robert A. Hackett stated, ‘[i]n war time, media are not mere observers

but simultaneously a source of intelligence, a combatant, a weapon, target, and a

battlefield’.10

As a consequence of this, conflicts and media enjoy an intricate and mutual

relationship.11 Reporting on armed conflict, and doing so exclusively, is highly

profitable. Further, news coverage of war can function as an effective propaganda

strategy to obtain a competitive advantage.12 Due to the media’s power in influencing

the audience’s opinion, media personnel13

are often hindered from executing their

scrutinising and educative roles. Not only are they frequently bound by regulations

from their own media outlet, but also by strict guidelines from their national

government or the government of the country they are reporting from.14

Freedom of

expression and information, which are the foundation of democracy and among the

most essential human rights,15

are frequently under threat, as the fear of the power of

' K Kang, ‘Opening Remarks by Ms. Kyung-wha Kang Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights at the panel discussion on the protection of journalists

in armed conflict’ (14th

session of the Human Rights Council, Geneva) (OHCHR, 4 June 2010) ( This function of the media is often referred to as the ‘fourth estate’. See D Dadge, The War in Iraq and Why the Media FailedUs (Praeger 2006) 1 F The terms ‘war’ and ‘armed conflict’ are used interchangeably. G S Kagan and H Durham, ‘The Media and International Humanitarian Law: Legal Protections for Journalists’ (2010) 16 PacificJournalism Review 96, 96-97 H I Detter, The Law of War (2nd edn, Cambridge University Press 2000) 323; A Kupfer-Schneider, ‘International Media andConflict Resolution: Making the Con-nection’ (2009) 93 Marquette Law Review 1, 6; A Mukherjee, ‘Protection of Journalists

under International Humanitarian Law’ (1995) 17 Communications and the Law 27, 28.

C See BA Taleb, The Bewildered Herd: Media Coverage of International Conflicts and Public Opinion, (iUniverse Inc 2004)."D RA Hackett, ‘Journalism versus Peace? Notes on a Problematic Relationship’ (2007) 2 Global Media Journal: MediterraneanEdition 47, 48.

"" SL Carruthers, The Media at War (2nd edn, Palgrave Macmillan 2011) 1, 5."# HD Laswell, Propaganda Technique in the World War (Peter Smith 1927); JM Lisosky and JR Henrichsen, War on Words:Who Should Protect Journalists (Praeger 2011) xix; G Spencer, The Media and Peace: From Vietnam to the ‘War on Terror’

(Palgrave Macmillan 2005); Taleb (n 6).

"& Defined by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in Recommendation No. 4 as ‘covering all representatives ofthe media, namely all those engaged in the collection, processing and dissemination of news and information including

cameramen and photographers, as well as support staff such as drivers and interpreters.’

"' See eg H Tumber and J Palmer, Media at War: The Iraq Crisis (SAGE Publications Ltd 2004, reprint 2006)."( Enshrined in International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March

1976) 999 UNTS 171 (ICCPR) art 19; European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, asamended by Protocols Nos 11 and 14 (adopted 4 November 1950, entered into force 3 September 1953) art 10; Lisosky and

Henrichsen, War on Words (n 9) xx; G Verschingel, ‘Towards a Better Protection for Journalists in Armed Conflicts’ (2008/9)


9/19

words and images drastically limits journalists’ leeway to report.16

Thus, a close link between the protection of journalists and the maintenance of

freedom of expression can be detected.17 In fact, it could be argued that targeting

journalists is a direct attack against freedom of expression and hence againstdemocracy. 18 As Koïchiro Matsuura, Director-General of the United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (‘UNESCO’), highlighted, ‘[e]very

aggression against a journalist is an attack on our most fundamental freedoms. Press

freedom and freedom of expression cannot be enjoyed without basic security’.19

History and General Distinctions

War reporting is a distinct type of journalism that has gained popularity over the past

decades, while drastically changing its form and purpose to align with the rapidly

shifting nature of wars worldwide. While journalists have covered wars as early as the

Crimean War and American Civil War, 20 their engagement has increasingly

professionalised, seeing a rise in the use of audio and visual means (World Wars I and

II and the Vietnam War),21 (real-time) TV reporting (Persian Gulf and Yugoslav

wars)22

and most recently, 24/7 news and cyber journalism (Afghanistan and Iraq

wars),23

as well as the involvement of local citizens in journalistic activities (Arab

uprisings).24

The role of the journalist, from an observer to an actual ‘member’ of the

conflict, and the involvement of the general population in journalistic activities has

changed drastically. This is enhanced by the fact that wars are, today, not solely

fought by means of war machinery but also by (dis)information and the controlthereof – the phenomenon of information warfare.

25

45 Jura Falconis 435.

"F Detter (n 5) 323; MD Kirkby and LJ Jackson, ‘International Humanitarian Law and the Protection of Media Personnel’ (1986)9 University of New South Wales Law Journal 1.

"G C Zanghì, ‘The Protection of Journalists in Armed Conflicts’ in PA Fernández-Sánchez (ed), The New Challenges of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts (Mar-tinus Nijhoff Publishers 2005) 146 "H JM Lisosky and JR Henrichsen, ‘Don’t Shoot the Messenger: Prospects for Protecting Journalists in Conflict Situations’(2009) 2 Media, War & Conflict 129; JM Lisosky and JR Henrichsen, War on Words (n 9) xviii.

"C UNESCO, ‘Press Freedom – Safety of Journalists and Impunity’ (2008) 4 #D William Howard Russell is considered the first modern war reporter. See A Lambert, ‘The Crimean War’ BBC (London, 29March 2011) accessed 3 October 2012; LP Masur, ‘The

Special Correspondent’ The New York Times (New York, 24 March 2011)

accessed 3 October 2012; D Randall, ‘William

Howard Russell’ (The Great Reporters) accessed 3 October 2012 #" Carruthers (n 8) 44-95 ## P Hammond, ‘“Humanitäre Intervention” und “Krieg gegen den Terror”’ in M Löffelholz (ed), Krieg als Medienereignis II: Krisenkommunikation im 21. Jahrhun-dert (VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften 2004) 101-109; D Kellner, ‘The Persian Gulf

TV War Revisited’ in S Allan and B Zelizer (eds), Reporting War: Journalism in Wartime (Routledge 2004) 136-154; Carruthers

(n 8) 96-174.

#& Allan and Zelizer (n 35); Carruthers (n 8) 209-252; Hammond (n 35) 109-115; H Tumber and F Webster, Journalists Under Fire (SAGE Publications Ltd, 2006). #'

S Khamis and K Vaughn, ‘Cyberactivism in the Egyptian Revolution: How Civic Engagement and Citizen Journalism Tiltedthe Balance’ (2011) 14 Arab Media and Society; RSF, Libya: The Birth of ‘Free Media’ in Eastern Libya (RSF, 2011).

#( As explained in Tumber and Webster, Journalists under Fire (n 36) 28-44


10/19

In relation to the greater proximity of journalists to the armed conflict, their increased

exposure and the (sporadic) involvement of local citizens, it is important to

distinguish between two types of occupational journalism: independent journalists and

war correspondents. Independent journalists are referred to as such because they are

not officially sanctioned by the military or government, and operate ‘independently’of these influences. They are defined as ‘[…] any correspondent, reporter,

photographer, and their technical film, radio and television assistants who are

ordinarily engaged in any of these activities as their principal occupation […]’.26

Thus, they are freelancers, stringers or part of a media organisation and known as

‘unilaterals’ in journalist jargon.27

War correspondents are defined as ‘specialized journalist[s] who [are] present, with

the authorization and under the protection of the armed forces of a belligerent, on the

theatre of operations and whose mission is to provide information on events relating

to ongoing hostilities’ by the Dictionnaire de droit international public. 28 This

definition is similar to that adopted in the United Nations Security Council’s

(‘UNSC’) Resolution 1738 and also mentioned in the Green Book of the British

Armed Forces, specifically emphasising the need for accreditation. 29 This

distinguishes them from independent journalists who are not officially authorised by

their government and accredited by the military. A distinct type of war correspondents

are those that are ‘embedded’ with the military, a term that has gained popularity

since the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003 but that was already used during World

War I.30

Embedded reporting is defined as ‘living, eating, moving in combat with the

units that the journalist is attached to’ by the Director of the embedding program inthe United States, Victoria Clarke.

31

Yoram Dinstein, International Law Professor Emeritus at Tel Aviv University and

President of the UN Association of Israel, proposes a third category in addition to

independent journalists and war correspondents, which he refers to as those

journalists who are members of the armed forces and cover the war for military news

organs.32 In the context of this article, such journalists are simply considered to be

#F Draft United Nations Convention on the Protection of Journalists Engaged in Dangerous Missions in Areas of Armed Conflict(1 August 1975) UN document A/10147, Annex 1, art 2(1) (Draft UN Convention);. These include freelancers and those being

employed full-time by media outlets #G Tumber and Webster, Journalists under Fire (n 36) 17.#H J Salmon (dir), Dictionnaire de Droit International Public (Bruylant, 2001) 275 [translated from French]. The ICTY initiallydefined war correspondents generally as ‘individuals who, for any period of time, report (or investigate for the purposes of

reporting) from a conflict zone on issues relating to the conflict’, omitting the need for accreditation in Prosecutor v Brdjanin

and Tali! IT-99-36-AR73.9 (11 December 2002) paragraph 29.

#C United Nations Security Council Resolution 1738 adopted at the 5613 th meeting, 23 December 2006, SC/8929; UnitedKingdom Ministry of Defence, The Green Book: MOD Working Arrangements with the Media 7 paragraph 31; see also ICRC (n

28).

&D R Keeble, ‘Information Warfare in an Age of Hyper-Militarism’ in Allan and Zelizer (n 35) 50; Gasser (n 17) 383-384; KTuosto, ‘The ‘Grunt Truth’ of Embedded Journalism: The New Media/Military Relationship’ (2008) X Stanford Journal of

International Relations 20.

&" Quoted in MM Haigh and others, ‘A Comparison of Embedded and Nonembedded Print Coverage of the U.S. Invasion andOccupation of Iraq’ (2006) 11 The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 139, 140 Dinstein (n 28) 455


11/19

members of the armed forces, in contrast to independent or accredited journalists, and

hence fall under the category of combatants.33

With regard to the increasing local presence of journalists in conflict areas and the

decreasing proximity between their work places and the frontline, it may be assumedthat war reporting has become ever more dangerous. In fact, Phillip Knightley, an

Australian journalist, states that ‘[i]t is safer to be a soldier these days than a war

correspondent’.34 It is, therefore, essential to distinguish between traditional threats

inherent to military operations and deliberate attacks on journalists.35

In many conflicts, journalists have been detained, injured or killed due to the fact that

covering the frontline of conflicts is dangerous by its nature.36 As the CPJ’s statistics

show, 173 journalists have been killed since 1992 ‘in crossfire/combat’, seeing a

drastic increase in the years that were marked by conflicts extensively reported on in

the media.37 One recent example is the death of Japanese video and photojournalist

Mika Yamamoto, who was killed during clashes between Syrian government forces

and rebels in Aleppo, Syria on 20 August 2012.38

However, even more frequently than becoming victims of dangers inherent to any

type of armed conflict, journalists have become popular targets for murders and

physical assaults, not least due to the growing power of the words and images which

journalists produce.39

In this context it is also interesting to note that according to

CPJ’s statistics, a great number of

journalist deaths are caused by government officials,40

which speaks for the

presumption that governments try to restrain the unfavourable effects of the media’s

power. The recent uprisings in Libya and Egypt in 2011 for example have shown that

journalists are visibly more exposed to targeted physical assaults and detention. The

CPJ recorded 160 attacks on journalists during the Egyptian uprisings,41 101 attacks

on journalists and their facilities, as well as 50 cases of detention during the Libyan

revolution.42

International Concern for Protection

&& See Part III for consequences in relation to their protection as combatants. &' P Knightley quoted in Lisosky and Henrichsen, War on Words (n 9) 157.&( Balguy-Gallois (n 29) 37 &F See also Gasser (n 17) 367. &G See eg in 1999, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2009. See CPJ, ‘954 Journalists Killed Since 1992’ (n 24).&H ‘Mika Yamamoto’ (CPJ ) accessed 3 October 2012; ‘Japanese journalist killed covering fightingin Syria’ BBC (London, 21 August 2012) accessed 3 October 2012. Other

famous incidents include the deaths of Marie Colvin and Gilles Jacquier in early 2012 &C Balguy-Gallois (n 29) 37; Detter (n 5) 323; Kirkby and Jackson (n 13) 1-2.'D CPJ, ‘954 Journalists Killed Since 1992’ (n 24).'" ‘Attacks on the Press in 2011: Egypt’ (CPJ ) accessed 3October 2012. '# ‘Attacks on the Press in 2011: Libya’ (CPJ ) accessed 3October 2012


12/19

In relation to these ever-growing dangers faced by journalists, who are essential in

monitoring States’ respect for the rights and wellbeing of their citizens, it must be

noted that the concern for their protection can similarly be traced back as far as to the

Crimean and American Civil War. This was initially focused on the protection of journalists accompanying the military as prisoners of war (‘POW’) and on the

issuance of an identity card to attest for such.43 Article 50 of the Lieber Code

provided that citizens accompanying the army, such as reporters, should, if captured,

be considered POWs.44 Similar provisions were subsequently integrated into the 1899

and 1907 Hague Convention on the Laws and Customs of War on Land (IV) under

Article 13 as well as into the Prisoner of War GC of 1929 under Article 81. 45

Independent journalists, however, were not afforded any protection under these initial

provisions, not even in the original 1949 GCs.

In the 1970s and most notably during the Vietnam War, the international community

concerned itself for the first time specifically with the physical protection of

independent journalists. 46 On 9 December 1970, the United Nations General

Assembly (‘UNGA’) adopted Resolution 2673 (XXV), directing the Economic and

Social Council to draft a ‘Convention on the Protection of Journalists Engaged in

Dangerous Missions in Areas of Armed Conflict’ through its Human Rights

Commission.47

This resulted in the 1975 Draft UN Convention, which was, at the

invitation of the UNGA, reviewed by the Diplomatic Conference on the

Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in

Armed Conflicts (1974-1977). The ad hoc Working Group of Committee I of thisconference considered that, instead of creating a separate convention resulting in a

special status for journalists, the protection should rather be incorporated into existing

IHL instruments. Finally, after approval of the UNGA, this lead to the inclusion of

Article 79 AP I, a specific provision relating to journalists, which, however, does not

afford special protections.48

'& Kirkby and Jackson (n 13) 6. The 1949 GCs did not contain the requirement that war correspondents had to be in possessionof a certificate to be protected by POW status, recognising the possibility of losing such a card during armed conflict. See

Mukherjee, ‘Protection of Journalists under International Humanitarian Law’ (n 5) 30. The idea of establishing an identity card

for journalists was already addressed at the 1927 Conference of Press Experts in Geneva. See League of Nations, Conference of Press Experts (1927) Doc A.34.

'' US War Department, ‘Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field (Lieber Code 1863)’ in TheWar of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (Government Printing Office,

1899) Series III, Volume 3 148-164.

'( Hague Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (18 October 1907 entered into force 26 January1910) (revised versions of the 1899 original) (Hague Convention IV); Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners

of War (27 July 1929 entered into force 19 June 1931).

'F Gasser (n 17) 370. The international Congresses of the Press in Chicago and Belgium in 1893 and 1894 focused on thefreedom of the press and the improvement of working conditions.

'G Draft UN Convention (n 40) Annex 1; see the Final Act of the Official Records of the Diplomatic Conference on theReaffirmation and Development of Inter-national Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts Vol X 75.

'H Only the Waleed Sadi Report in 1990 and the Mac Bride Commission Report in 1977 treated the issues of special protection, but did not result in additional legal instruments. See D Howard, ‘Remaking the Pen Mightier than the Sword: an Evaluation of

the Growing Need for the International Protection of Journalists’ (2001/2) 30 Georgia Journal of International and Comparative


13/19

The wars in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan initiated fresh discussions on how to

better protect journalists, which resulted in various proposals from the international

community, including: RSF’s Charter for the Safety of Journalists Working in War

Zones or Dangerous Areas (2002);

49

the Geneva Declaration on Actions to PromoteSafety and Security of Journalists and Media in Dangerous Situations (2004);50

UNSC Resolution 1738 (2006); 51 UNESCO’s Berlin Declaration (2000) 52 and

Medellin Declaration on Securing the Safety of Journalists and Combating Impunity

(2007);53 and PEC’s Draft Convention to Strengthen the Protection of Journalists in

Armed Conflicts and Other Situations Including Civil Unrest and Targeted Killings

(2007).

It is noteworthy that instead of resulting in a unified and coherent approach to the

issue, the international concern brought about a variety of individual and rarely

binding initiatives. The most common and possibly sole mutual characteristics are the

call for a reaffirmation of IHL and the call upon States to ratify the APs.54 This

confirms the significance of IHL in the protection of journalists in armed conflicts.

Protection of Journalists under International Humanitarian Law

General protective principles and the protection of journalists are part of the jus in

bello or IHL ,55

which comprises a set of rules ‘designed to regulate the treatment of

the individual – civilian or military, wounded or active’56

in armed conflicts. IHL

applies the principle of distinction57

and hence protects combatants58

and civilians59

Law 505.

'C RSF, ‘Charter for the Safety of Journalists’ (n 30).(D ‘Geneva Declaration on Actions to Promote Safety and Security of Journalists and Media in Dangerous Situations, Meetingorganised by PEC’ (20-21 September 2004) accessed 28 January

2013.

(" Res 1738 (n 43).(# 49

UNESCO, ‘Berlin Declaration: Journalists in Danger – How can we help?’ (6 November 2000).

(& UNESCO, ‘Medellin Declaration on Securing the Safety of Journalists and Combating Impunity’ (3-4 May 2007).(' Most proposals also emphasise the duty to investigate, prosecute and punish crimes committed on journalists.((

Fleck (n 26) 1.(F ibid 11. Today, IHL is mainly made up of the GCs and their APs. The GCs are universally ratified and hence applicableworldwide. Most provisions in AP I are considered customary international law and are therefore universally applicable.

Additionally, basic rules of IHL are considered jus cogens, rendering any other set of rules conflicting with IHL automatically

void. See Fleck (n 26); Dinstein (n 28) 454-455; TD Gill and D Fleck (eds), The Handbook of the International Law of Military

Operations (Oxford University Press, 2010). Customary international humanitarian law is summarised by the ICRC and

Cambridge University Press in an online database and in JM Henckaerts and L Doswald-Beck, Customary International

Humanitarian Law Volume I: Rules and Volume II: Practice Parts 1 and 2 (ICRC and Cambridge University Press 2005).

(G The principle of distinction derives from the fact that IHL is a compromise between military objectives and human necessity.It refers to the requirement of distinguishing between military objectives/combatants and civilian objects/non-combatants,

providing for a limited war. AP I, art 48; Protocol Additional (II) to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to

the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (adopted 8 June 1977, entered into force 7 December 1978) 1125

UNTS 609 (AP II) art 13(2)-(3); Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck (n 71) Volume I and Volume II, Rules 1, 6 and 7; Fleck (n 26)

37; Gill and Fleck (n 71) 52; Balguy-Gallois (n 29) 48.(H AP I, art 43(2).(C AP I, art 50


14/19

differently. This is of importance when analysing the protection of journalists, which

will be outlined in the following section. Additionally, IHL recognises persons

attached to the armed forces as a special group of protected persons.

It is important to note that next to IHL, human rights law is also applicable to armedconflicts, even though most provisions can be derogated from during war and have

inherent limitations. In case of conflicting and/or disharmonious provisions of IHL

and human rights, IHL is to be regarded as lex specialis in times of armed conflict.60

Thus, in such cases IHL, as the specific law in armed conflicts, overrides human

rights as the general law or lex generalis.61

a.

Protection Relative to Attacks

The main and most important IHL Article explicitly referring to the protection of

journalists in international armed conflicts (‘IACs’) is Article 79 AP I, which was

included as a specific provision relating to journalists in the body of IHL.62 It provides

that journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflict,

whether independent journalists or war correspondents accompanying the armed

forces, are to be considered as civilians within the meaning of Article 50(1) AP I.

Thus, attacks on journalists are strictly prohibited under IHL. Journalists are afforded

the whole set of protections relative to civilians, including under Articles 51 and 57

AP I63

and GC IV.64

This is, however, only the case unless and for as long as they do

not take any action adversely affecting their status as civilians, as outlined in Article

79(2) AP I.65

As soon as they take direct part in hostilities they lose their protectionunder this Article.

66 Journalists have a duty to not engage in any actions adverse to

their status of civilians and may be held accountable for acts of perfidy pursuant to

Article 37(1)(c) AP I and for spying pursuant to Article 46 AP I.

Although AP II relative to non-international armed conflicts (‘NIACs’) does not

contain specific provisions on the protection of journalists, their protection as

FD

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) [1996] ICJ Rep para 25F" The legal maxim reads: lex specialis derogat legi generali. Although not the focus of this article, relevant references to humanrights will be indicated in the text and/ or footnotes.

F# This Article was adopted by consensus and hence no reservations have been made F& According to Article 51 AP I, civilians may not be made targets of military attacks or reprisals, shall enjoy general protection and maynot be subjected to threats of violence. It prohibits indiscriminate attacks and the use of civilians as shields. Article 57 AP I emphasises

that constant care must be taken to spare civilians.

F' This is in contrast to combatants, who may be lawfully targeted within the context of armed conflicts. IHL provides protections to combatants in relation to the following three situations: as a wounded, sick and shipwrecked, as dead and missing

and as POW.

F( This implies that journalists must also respect domestic regulations relating to the access to territory and that they may losetheir right to reside and work in a country if they have entered illegally. See explanation to Rule 34, Henckaerts and Doswald-

Beck (n 71).

FF For the time they take part in hostilities, they fall under the protection of Article 45 AP I and immediately regain their statusas civilians after seizing all adverse activities.


15/19


16/19

Article 79(2) AP I also refers to specific protections in case of detention pursuant to

Article 4(A)(4) GC III as POWs. The protection as POW relates inter alia to persons

accompanying the armed forces without actually being members thereof, including

war correspondents. Thus, in case of falling into the hand of the adversary, warcorrespondents benefit from all protections relative to POWs. Article 4(A)(4) GC III,

however, does not relate to nationals of a Party to the conflict nor to nationals of co-

belligerent or neutral States maintaining diplomatic relations with the belligerent

State. Moreover, both Articles only apply to IACs.

In the case of NIACs, journalists are at least protected by the minimum guarantees

enshrined in Common Article 3. These are similar to and amplified by AP II but still

more restricted than those afforded under Article 75 AP I. The protections under the

legal regime governing NIACs for example do not provide for special status as POW

and also do ‘not offer much help against unjustified detention’. 74 Nevertheless,

violations of journalists’ rights in detention, such as fair trial and humane treatment

are considered grave breaches of IHL and lead to prosecution.75

Article 79(3) AP I is considered an additional protective measure in relation to arrests

as it provides for the carrying of identification cards. Such cards, however, neither

confer a special status as ‘journalist’ nor are they indispensable, but simply attest to

the fact that journalists are authorised to accompany the armed forces. In case of war

correspondents, identity cards are mandatory under GC III and must be carried at all

times.76

Vulnerability of local journalists

Of all journalists working in dangerous situations, local reporters run the greatest risk

of becoming victims of violence. According to the CPJ analysis, 85 % of all

journalists killed were not foreign correspondents working in war zones, but local

journalists doing their work. They were typically murdered “not on assignment, but in

their offices, on their commutes, or in their homes. Nine out of 10 murders, CPJ

found, had the hallmarks of premeditation such as careful planning, groups of

assailants, and gangland style executions.” In conflict zones and countries where press

freedom is not sufficiently valued, journalists become targets of rebel groups, militias,

drug traffickers, extremists or corrupt politicians. While international journalists are

often heavily equipped and protected, local journalists usually do not have the means

to protect themselves sufficiently. One of the objectives of every safety strategy

G' Dinstein (n 28) 469; Gasser (n 17) 376.G( Gasser (n 17) 375 GF See Geneva Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, (12 August 1949 entered into force 21 October

1950) 75 UNTS 135, Annex IV (A); United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (n 43) paras 31, 37. Identity cards are not providedfor under IHL for independent journalists in NIACs.


17/19

should be the provision of safety training for local journalists and the development of

international norms for safety training and equipment.

Criminal organisations, corruption and investigative journalism

“However professionally and accurately information is processed, corruption will

continue to thrive without the vigilance of the media and civil society, and the bravery

of investigative journalists and whistleblowers in particular.”

Assuring the right of press freedom should be a priority for every government

worldwide. All too often, journalists do not have the independence they would need to

reveal corruption or misuse of power, to denounce attacks on human rights and to

facilitate an open dialogue between the state and civil society. The measures taken by

different governments in order to control – directly or indirectly – the media differ in

motivations yet share the same threat to democratic process. Again, the CPJ analysis

confirms this assumption: almost one-quarter of all journalists killed over the past 15

years covered political topics, one fifth aimed at exposing corruption.

It is vital to stress the importance of free access to information and press freedom in

the struggle against corruption and for the promotion of good governance of public

life.

Case Study

Following James Foley’s death puts spotlight on journalist in conflict zones. After a

video recording containing the execution of kidnapped American freelance journalist,

raises the question of safety towards freelance journalists who goes into conflict

situations to report. The self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS) militant group beheaded

Mr. Foley and threatens to kill another freelancer named, Steven Sotloff after their

disappearance in Syria in 2012. Unfortunately, the United States could not meet the

demands of IS and therefore had to watch the horrific video –that is, the fate of their

own people in the hands of a terrorist group. It is unknown to many on the number of

journalists IS is currently holding. Foley and Sotloff’s murder goes to show the

danger of reporting in conflict zones that has yet reach this point. It also gives light to

a different focus on the relationship between media outlets and the freelance journalist

who chooses to work in such dangerous situations.

Individual news outlets make their own choices when considering work from

freelancers. This does not include hostile environment training they require reporters

and photographers to have. There is no requirement as to the requirement of hostile

environment training as well as experience reporting from conflict zones. Freelancers

are often left with the responsibility for their own insurance and potential medical

fees.

“The high cost of safely reporting from war zones and the low pay for pieces.”

Anybody who is in freelance work, especially artistically, knows that it comes with

all the insecurity and the ups and downs. It really is a frightening life.


18/19

Question A Resolution Must Answer

1. In what way (or what kind of mechanisms) can the international community

participate in the protection of journalist?

2. How can the safety of freelance journalists be ensured in conflict areas? Would

the standard of protection be the same as those working in news organizations? 3.

Would it be fair to allow freelance journalists to risk their lives in exchange of

obtaining news coverage? How do media outlets face difficult decisions over

when and how to use such reports?

4.

How would regions with high risk threat respond to the presence of journalists in

its lands?

5. Should non-profit journalism organizations (e.g. Reporters Without Borders) be

involved with the conditions of the reporters? Would this be considered an effort

at a national level to compliment the efforts made internationally?


19/19

CONTACT INFORMATION

model united nation study guide

Documents