Rule 34. Civilian journalists engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflict must be respected and protected as long as they are not taking a direct part in hostilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Volume II, Chapter 10.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The protection of civilian journalists is set forth in Article 79 of Additional Protocol I, to which no reservations have been made.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n This rule is set forth in numerous military manuals.[2]<\/a> It is also supported by official statements and reported practice.[3]<\/a> This practice includes that of States not party to Additional Protocol I.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Although Additional Protocol II does not contain any specific provision on civilian journalists, their immunity against attack is based on the prohibition on attacking civilians unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities (see Rule 6). This conclusion is borne out by practice, even before the adoption of the Additional Protocols. Brazil in 1971 and the Federal Republic of Germany in 1973 stated before the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly that journalists were protected as civilians under the principle of distinction.[5]<\/a> The UN Commission on the Truth for El Salvador considered the murder of four Dutch journalists, accompanied by members of the FMLN, who were ambushed by a patrol of the Salvadoran armed forces, to be in violation of international humanitarian law, \u201cwhich stipulates that civilians shall not be the object of attacks\u201d.[6]<\/a> In 1996, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe reaffirmed the importance of Article 79 of Additional Protocol I, \u201cwhich provides that journalists shall be considered as civilians and shall be protected as such\u201d. It considered that \u201cthis obligation also applies with respect to non-international armed conflicts\u201d.[7]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The obligation to respect and protect civilian journalists is included in other instruments pertaining also to non-international armed conflicts.[8]<\/a> It is contained in military manuals which are applicable in or have been applied in non-international armed conflicts.[9]<\/a> It is supported by official statements and reported practice.[10]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n No official contrary practice was found with respect to either international or non-international armed conflicts. Deliberate attacks on journalists have generally been condemned, in particular by the United Nations and other international organizations, regardless of whether the conflict was international or non-international. Most of these condemnations concerned non-international armed conflicts such as in Afghanistan, Burundi, Chechnya, Kosovo and Somalia.[11]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Like other civilians, journalists lose their protection against attack when and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities (see Rule 6). This principle is also recognized in Article 79(2) of Additional Protocol I, which grants protection to civilian journalists \u201cprovided that they take no action adversely affecting their status\u201d.[12]<\/a> This also implies that journalists, like any other person entering a foreign country, must respect that country\u2019s domestic regulations concerning access to its territory. Journalists may lose their right to reside and work in a foreign country if they have entered illegally. In other words, the protection granted to journalists under international humanitarian law in no way changes the rules applicable to access to territory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Civilian journalists are not to be confused with \u201cwar correspondents\u201d. The latter are journalists who accompany the armed forces of a State without being members thereof. As a result, they are civilians and may not be made the object of attack (see Rule 1).[13]<\/a> Pursuant to Article 4(A)(4) of the Third Geneva Convention, however, war correspondents are entitled to prisoner-of-war status upon capture.[14]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to the prohibition of attacks against journalists, there is also practice which indicates that journalists exercising their professional activities in relation to an armed conflict must be protected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 1996, the UN General Assembly called on all parties to the conflict in Afghanistan to \u201censure the safety\u201d of representatives of the media.[15]<\/a> Other practice condemns specific measures taken to dissuade journalists from carrying out their professional activities. In 1998, for example, the UN General Assembly called on parties to the conflict in Kosovo to refrain from any harassment and intimidation of journalists.[16]<\/a> In 1995, the UN Commission on Human Rights deplored attacks, acts of reprisal, abductions and other acts of violence against representatives of the international media in Somalia.[17]<\/a> Other acts which have been condemned include: police violence, threats of legal prosecutions and subjection to defamation campaigns and physical violence;[18]<\/a> threats to treat the media as enemies serving foreign powers and denial of full and unhindered access;[19]<\/a> assaults upon freedom of the press and crimes against journalists;[20]<\/a> killing, wounding and abduction;[21]<\/a> attacks, murder, unjustified imprisonment and intimidation;[22]<\/a> and harassment, interference, detention and murder.[23]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n It should be stressed that, as civilians, journalists are entitled to the fundamental guarantees set out in Chapter 32. If they are accused of spying, for example, they must not be subjected to arbitrary detention (see Rule 99) and must be granted a fair trial (see Rule 100).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [1]<\/a> – Additional Protocol I, Article 79 (adopted by consensus) (cited in Vol. II, Ch. 10, \u00a7 1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2]<\/a> – See, e.g., the military manuals of Argentina (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 4), Australia (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 5), Benin (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 6), Cameroon (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 7), Canada (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 8), France (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 9), Germany (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 10), Israel (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 11), Madagascar (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 12), Netherlands (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 13), New Zealand (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 14), Nigeria (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 15), Spain (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 16) and Togo (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 17).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3]<\/a> – See the statements of Brazil (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 22), Federal Republic of Germany (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 23) and United States (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7\u00a7 28\u201329) and the reported practice of Jordan (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 24), Republic of Korea (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 25), Nigeria (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 26) and Rwanda (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 27).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [4]<\/a> – See, e.g., the practice of Israel (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 11) and the United States (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7\u00a7 28\u201329).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [5]<\/a> – See the statements of Brazil (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 22) and the Federal Republic of Germany (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 23).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [6]<\/a> – UN Commission on the Truth for El Salvador, Report (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 41).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [7]<\/a> – Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers, Rec. R (96) 4 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 42).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [8]<\/a> – See, e.g., Memorandum of Understanding on the Application of IHL between Croatia and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, \u00a7 4 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 2); Agreement on the Application of IHL between the Parties to the Conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, \u00a7 2.3 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 3).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [9]<\/a> – See, e.g., the military manuals of Benin (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 6), Germany (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 10), Madagascar (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 12), Nigeria (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 15) and Togo (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 17).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [10]<\/a> – See, e.g., the statements of Brazil (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 22), Federal Republic of Germany (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 23), Nigeria (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 26) and United States (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7\u00a7 28\u201329) and the reported practice of Jordan (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 24), Republic of Korea (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 25) and Rwanda (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 27).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [11]<\/a> – See, e.g., UN General Assembly, Res. 2673 (XXV), 2854 (XXVI), 3058 (XXVIII) and 3500 (XXX) (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 32), Res. 51\/108 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 33) and Res. 53\/164 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 34); UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1995\/56 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 36) and Res. 1996\/1 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 37); European Parliament, Resolution on the situation in Kosovo (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 45) and Resolution on violations of human rights and humanitarian law in Chechnya (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 46).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [12]<\/a> – Additional Protocol I, Article 79(2) (adopted by consensus) (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [13]<\/a> – See, e.g., Additional Protocol I, Article 50(1) (adopted by consensus) (cited in Vol. II, Ch. 1, \u00a7 705).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [14]<\/a> – Third Geneva Convention, Article 4(A)(4) (\u201cpersons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as \u2026 war correspondents \u2026 provided that they have received authorization, from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model\u201d are entitled to prisoner-of-war status upon capture).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [15]<\/a> – UN General Assembly, Res. 51\/108 (cited in Vol. II, Ch. 10, \u00a7 33).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [16]<\/a> – UN General Assembly, Res. 53\/164 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 34).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [17]<\/a> – UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1995\/56 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 36).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [18]<\/a> – Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, Rec. 1368 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 43) and Written Declaration No. 284 (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 44).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [19]<\/a> – European Parliament, Resolution on the situation in Kosovo (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 45) and Resolution on violations of human rights and humanitarian law in Chechnya (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 46).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [20]<\/a> – OAS General Assembly, Res. 1550 (XXVIII-O\/98) (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [21]<\/a> – 90th Inter-Parliamentary Conference, Resolution on respect for international humanitarian law and support for humanitarian action in armed conflicts (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 49).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [22]<\/a> – Committee to Protect Journalists, Attacks on the Press 2000<\/em> (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 59).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [23]<\/a> – International Federation of Journalists, 22nd World Congress, Resolution on Angola (ibid.<\/em>, \u00a7 53).<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\nNon-international armed conflicts<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Loss of protection<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Definition<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Respect for and protection of journalists<\/h3>\n\n\n\n