[GA - PASSED] Safety and Integrity in Conflict Journalism

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hulldom

Winter Kingdom
-
Pronouns
He/Him/His
TNP Nation
Boston Castle
Discord
seathestarlesssky
ga.jpg

Safety and Integrity in Conflict Journalism
Category: Education and Creativity | Area of Effect: Free Press
Proposed by: Refuge Isle | Onsite Topic


The General Assembly,

Observing that, in times of unrest, a scrutinising media provides a safety net for civilians in conflict's path, not only by keeping them apprised of dangers, but by holding leaders accountable for what atrocities might otherwise be concealed,

Recognising that, while operating in close proximity to a conflict zone is perilous, a journalist's actions may be the only mechanism by which news of happenings may be returned to international authorities,

Aware that conflict journalists face dangers beyond battlefield hazards, including being specifically targeted for arrest, kidnapping, and murder by belligerent factions or even their own government,

Resolved that it falls to the World Assembly to establish specific provisions which protect these journalists, safeguard their vital function, and assist in providing reports of non-compliance with international law,

May it be enacted that this chamber:

  1. Defines within this resolution:
    1. a "conflict zone" as a battlefield, combat area, or zone where military-grade equipment is deployed to defeat, rout, or suppress opposing forces.
    2. a "conflict journalist" as a reporter or a reporter's technical assistant, operating independent of any belligerent faction, and employed in providing journalism from an ongoing conflict zone or its immediate surrounding area.
    3. an "act of espionage" as the clandestine gathering, reporting, or delivery of information for the purposes of benefiting one or more belligerent factions, except to uphold international law.
    4. an "act of warfare" to be any of the following:
      1. The capturing or killing of combatants.
      2. The intentional damage or destruction of equipment or vehicles deployed to the conflict.
      3. The transportation of personnel or supplies for a party of the conflict.

  2. Declares that conflict journalists:
    1. are classified as civilian non-combatants of a protected status.
    2. are permitted to carry out any journalism that is not an act of espionage from or near a conflict zone.
    3. are prohibited from carrying, operating, or transporting weaponry in a conflict zone.
    4. are prohibited from hiring or otherwise soliciting the services of armed escorts and mercenaries.
    5. are prohibited from accessing military facilities, except when invited by the owner or controller of the facility.

  3. Prohibits member nations from:
    1. disallowing conflict journalists access to a conflict zone and freedom of movement within it.
    2. undertaking retaliatory action towards conflict journalists in response to unfavourable press coverage, or fear thereof.
    3. detaining conflict journalists solely to limit their access to the conflict zone, or to delay their reporting.

  4. Establishes that the kidnapping, murder, or deliberate use of a conflict journalist as a military target shall be illegal and considered a war crime.

  5. Clarifies that a conflict journalist who commits an act of espionage or proactively engages in an act of warfare will be considered a hostile combatant, exempt from the protections of this resolution, and unable to be considered a civilian in the conflict.
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

[TR][TD]For[/TD][TD] Against [/TD][TD] Abstain [/TD][TD] Present [/TD][/TR][TR][TD]9[/TD][TD]7[/TD][TD]2[/TD][TD]2[/TD][/TR]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IFV - Against

Overview
"Safety and Integrity in Conflict Journalism" seeks to protect journalists operating in conflict zones. The proposal grants journalists in these areas protected status, and prohibits member nations from obstructing or retaliating against these journalists. Journalists themselves are forbidden from engaging in various hostile activities lest they forfeit the protections of this proposal.

Recommendation
Despite good intentions and a clear subject area, this proposal is compromised by issues in its execution. The definition of an "act of espionage" is inherently exploitable by bad actors due to actions only being classified as espionage if they are done to benefit a "belligerent faction"- third parties are exempt. Actions done with the nebulous aim of "[upholding] international law" are likewise exempt, allowing for straightforward circumvention. Additionally, clause 2b's allowance of "any journalism" would even apply to journalism that would otherwise be illegal without being classified as espionage.

For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends voting Against the at-vote General Assembly proposal "Safety and Integrity in Conflict Journalism".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This proposal has achieved the necessary approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being marked illegal or being withdrawn, this proposal will go to a vote at next Sunday's Major Update (Sunday, May 9).
 
For, with the caveat that this is not really an effective resolution in the sense that if someone is going to run amok with the Geneva Convention, killing a few journalists (deliberately) is just going to be a matter of an extra cachet of bullets.
 
Last edited:
This proposal has achieved the necessary approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being withdrawn or marked illegal, it will proceed to vote at next Thursday’s (May 19) Major Update.
 
Here are the reasons I have so far compiled from outside the IFV for why people should vote against:
  • The resolution fails to prevent non-state entities from targeting conflict journalists
  • Article 1(b) can be abused by belligerent factions to stifle reporting from conflict journalists that are only nominally associated with another belligerent faction (for instance if the Philippines is at war with Canada, they could use Article 1(b) to target journalists from the Canadian public broadcaster CBC and the Canadian private broadcaster CTV in order to prevent them from reporting in or near a conflict zone where combat between the two nations' militaries is taking place). Simply put, the resolution fails to justify denying protections to conflict journalists purely due to affiliation with one entity or another.
  • I believe that conflict journalists should at least have access to sidearms for self-protection, especially against non-state entities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top