a background guide for thekathmandu, nepal email: [email protected] m alok model united...

A Background Guide for the

Social, Humanitarian andCultural Committee

Table of Contents

Letter from the Secretary-General...........................................................................................................3Letter from the Director..................................................................................................................................5Introduction............................................................................................................................................................6History of the Committee..............................................................................................................................6

Topic Area: Journalistic Freedoms and Protections.......................................................................7Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................................................7History of the Problem....................................................................................................................................8Current Situation..............................................................................................................................................11Relevant UN Actions.....................................................................................................................................16Timeline.................................................................................................................................................................18Proposed Solutions.........................................................................................................................................18Bloc Positions....................................................................................................................................................20Relevant Partners.............................................................................................................................................22Questions a Resolution Must Answer.................................................................................................22Suggestions for Further Research..........................................................................................................23

Position Paper Requirements....................................................................................................................23Closing Remarks..............................................................................................................................................23Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................................24

Lavansh SagtaniSecretary-General

Amulya ChaudharyDirector-General

Aryan PansariUnder-Secretary-General

Head

Hardic JajodiaUnder-Secretary-General

Administration

Archita AgrawalUnder-Secretary-General

Committees

Anand Bhairav Marg, AlokVidyashram

Kathmandu, NepalEmail:

[email protected]

Alok Model United Nations A LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

Dear Delegates,

It is my distinct pleasure to welcome you to the first session of Alok Model United

Nation. I hope that you are excited to embark on your preparations for the conference,

and even more excited to begin working in one of the four challenging, creative,

collaborative, solutions-oriented, and above all substantively enriching committees.

The United Nations as a body and Model UN an activity stress diplomacy, innovation,

and cooperation. It is through becoming substantively engaged and deeply

knowledgeable about these topics that you may proceed to develop your own solutions

and work with your fellow delegates in discussion, promotion, and hopefully even

resolution about the challenges facing your committee. We encourage you to take this

background guide as a starting point for your research and use it as inspiration in your

own preparation as well as in your everyday thinking. As a conference, in AMUN

delegates will tackle issues spanning the centuries from 1740 to 2019, topics pertinent

to every inhabited continent, and ideas that are capable of nothing short of changing

the world. The opportunity to discuss and develop innovative approaches to the

world’s most pressing global questions with is an unparalleled one, and I hope you

seize it to its full extent.

We look forward to meeting each and every one of you on this adventure together. For

now, allow this background guide to be your starting point on your AMUN journey. We

hope it will be a memorable one.

Sincerely,

Lavansh Sagtani

Secretary-General

Alok Model United Nations

Alok Model United Nations is co-produced by Alok Vidyashram

Lavansh SagtaniSecretary-General

Amulya ChaudharyDirector-General

Aryan PansariUnder-Secretary-General

Head

Hardic JajodiaUnder-Secretary-General

Administration

Archita AgrawalUnder-Secretary-General

Committees

Anand Bhairav Marg,Alok VidyashramKathmandu, Nepal

Email:[email protected]

om

Alok Model United NationsA LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR

Dear Delegates,

Welcome, again, to Alok Model United Nations and to the Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee! I’m looking forward to meeting all of you and hearing you debate this important and pertinent topic.

My name is Hardic Jajodia and I am a first-year student. I’m very involved in Model UN- I have attended various MUN’s from around the world and I am very excited to share another one of my experiences with all of you. I hope that in these upcoming days we will do our best to bring out the best from this committee session. Apart from my involvement with Model UN, I play basketball and sing. In my free time, I enjoy listening to music and going on adventures.

I hope that this background guide proves to be a useful and informative resource in your research leading up to conference. I’ve included the sources that I am consulting in the Bibliography section of the background guide, and I encourage you to consult those and other sources in the formulation of your country’s policy and while writing your positionpaper.

If you have any questions about the committee, topic, parliamentary procedure, model UN, or anything at all, please feel free to contact me—I would love to hear from you.

Sincerely,

Hardic JajodiaSocial, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee, Director Alok Model United Nations

Alok Model United Nations is co-produced by Alok Vidyashram.

6 Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee

Introduction

The Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committeeof Harvard Model United Nations India 2015 willbe an exciting and substantively challengingGeneral Assembly committee. The selected topichas had a fair amount of discussion and debate inthe chambers on First Avenue in New York;however, no final consensus has been reached andthe plight of journalists throughout the world hasnot subsided. It is, therefore, up to us as acommittee to deliberate and innovate on this topicand to reach a useful, meaningful, and realisticresolution on journalistic freedom and violenceagainst journalists.

The importance of freedom of journaliststhroughout the world cannot be understated. Thenightly news, newspaper and magazines, and,increasingly so, web media and blogs relay up-to-the-minute information and happenings to theworld at large. Without journalists,correspondents, and their support staff, the worldwould be a more ignorant place, with no regardfor foreign cultures or events, tragic or felicitousalike. The United Nations was built to be acommunity of understanding and interaction andjournalism is one of the ways through which thisunderstanding and interaction has been achieved.As we move deeper into the twenty first century,we must continue to ensure the ability of ourpress to report without bias or hindrance toadvance the citizenry’s knowledge further.

Ultimately, the work of SOCHUM at thissession of Harvard Model United Nations Indiawill be incredibly important to the world atlarge. Debate on our topic will have importantrepercussions for the freedom and travel ofinformation throughout the world.

History of the CommitteeThe Social, Humanitarian and CulturalCommittee is the Third Committee of the UnitedNations. It held its first meeting on “11 January

1946, at 3 p.m.” and, of course, its first matter ofaffairs was the “election of a chairman” for the newbody!1 Soon thereafter, however, the committeebegan more substantive work and immediatelyimmersed itself in its agenda of furthering therights of all people throughout the world. Duringthe first of the committee’s substantive sessions,proposals were heard “concerning the participationof women in United Nations conferences andconcerning the status of women.”2

Indeed, the role of women in the world hasproved to be a major topic of discussion in theThird Committee. Thirty-seven years after thecommittee’s founding, the UN Chroniclereported that the main focus points of the ThirdCommittee were “women, human rights, andrefugees.”3 This has held true for much of thecommittee’s history since then as well; however,as human rights, women’s rights, and refugeerights become more and more commonplace andaccepted throughout the world, the debate withinSOCHUM has become less contentious andmore widely agreed upon. Hopefully, this year’sSOCHUM topic will force you to think aboutnational allegiances and cultural norms and willnot lend itself to devilishly easy consensus.

Similarly to the other bodies of the GeneralAssembly, the Social, Humanitarian and Culturalcommittee does not undertake binding measureson topics of debate and discussion. Thecommittee considers various draft resolutionproposals— some of which are forwarded to itfrom other bodies, if they fall into the ThirdCommittee’s purview. The resolutions that thecommittee passes generally contain suggestivelanguage such as ‘suggests, encourages,’ or‘frowns upon,’ rather than more direct, bindingterms like ‘implores’ or ‘condemns.’

In spite of this, the Social, Humanitarian and Culturalcommittee has achieved many incredible things in itshistory. Many important UN documents such as theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights or theDeclaration of the Rights of the Child had theirbeginnings in ideas brought

Alok Model United Nations 2019 7

forward in the Third Committee. Oftentimes, themain committees of the General Assembly willcreate further subcommittees within themselves,according to certain guidelines.4 It is in thesesubcommittees that further work is done onpressing issues and these subcommitteesthemselves sometimes evolve into standingbodies that undertake incredibly important workwhose intentions began under the UN Charter’soutline for the Third Committee!

One of the newest undertakings of the ThirdCommittee is its interaction with the SpecialProcedures of the Human Rights Council. Since2006, the Social, Humanitarian and CulturalCommittee has met with dozens of “independenthuman rights experts [who have] mandates toreport and advise on human rights from athematic or country-specific perspective.”5 Theseexperts provide important information and datato the Third Committee, which it is then able toutilize in its resolutions and recommendationsfor improving human rights throughout theworld. During its current session, the ThirdCommittee “will hear and interact with 52 suchspecial rapporteurs, independent experts, andchairs of working groups” to facilitate its work.6

In sum, the work of the Third Committee hasbeen pertinent to the world at large ever since thebody’s founding. While its debate on mattersunder its purview may have become lessincensed over the years, the matters pertaining tohuman rights, among all the other things thatSOCHUM discusses, remain at the forefront ofthe world’s psyche and of paramount importanceto the wellbeing of all people.

Topic Area: Journalistic Freedoms and Protections

Statement of the ProblemOne of the world’s most exciting and popular professions is also one of the world’s most

dangerous. Journalism is defined as “the collectionand editing of news for presentation through themedia”7 and is carried out by different players inthe journalistic game throughout the world. On onehand, large international conglomerates such asReuters, Agence France-Presse, the AssociatedPress, or News Corporation maintain bureaus andcorrespondents the world over and dare to be firstin reporting the world’s latest happenings. On theother side of the spectrum, one finds a differenttype of journalist: the local freelancer or activist-blogger, aiming to carry out one of journalists’most sacred duties: exposing corruption andkeeping the masses informed. While both types ofcorrespondents carry their associated biases andpersonal or professional aims, people often forgetthat a journalist’s main desire is for an informedpopulace and for transparency in world affairs.Unlike what pundits would have you believe,journalists do not exist solely to further the agendasof their respective news agencies or politicalaffiliations.

Rather unfortunately, as a result of journalists’commitment to seeking out the truth and bringing itto light, journalists, particularly those coveringconflict and war, have become extremelyvulnerable in the performance of their craft. In hisbook Killing the Messenger, Herbert Foerstel citesa quote from the “[11 January 2005 episode of]… PBS [Public Broadcasting Service] TV newsseries Frontline … [which] opened the show bystating, ‘In Iraq, 54 journalists have died since thewar began, nearly double the number of reporterskilled in Vietnam’”8. Indeed, examining morecurrent statistics, 145 journalists in Iraq were killedwith a “confirmed motive” of silencing journalismbetween 2003 and 20109. This number does notinclude support staff like cameramen, drivers, ortranslators. Moreover, this number does not includejournalists whose deaths were marked “motiveunclear,” or for whom it was not certain that theirdeaths were caused by an assault on the work theywere performing. Meanwhile, on its website, theNewseum in Washington, D.C. reports that 33journalists “died covering the news” during theVietnam War10. These numbers


demonstrate a marked shift in the journalisticprofession and how it is perceived, valued, andtreated by the people of the world.

It is imperative that the dangerous situationfacing today’s journalists be somehow mitigatedin order for journalism to survive as a viableconduit of information throughout the world.Journalists are some of the bravest individualswho exist in the world, daring to enter conflictand combat forces significantly stronger thanthemselves just to ensure that the truth is alwaysheard. Additionally, journalists in the field areour only objective sources of analysis for currentevents as they are oftentimes the only ‘boots onthe ground’ other than those of combatants orsoldiers. Therefore, in order to maintain a well-versed and aware citizenry, journalists must beable to report, and freedom of the press shouldremain a priority throughout the world.

Journalists are, after all, simply people with apassion for and devotion to their craft, and asunarmed purveyors of foreign cultures and eventsmust be allowed to transit, reside, and carry outtheir duties without fear for their person, their staff,their equipment, or their voice.

History of the ProblemJournalists’ freedom to report and violenceagainst the media are two topics that havechanged drastically in recent years. While theworld has become more interconnected and thedissemination of news has become simpler inrecent years, the forces aiming to preventdissemination of certain facts have also becomestronger. Likewise, journalists reporting fromconflict and non-conflict zones today encounterdifferent dangers than they did historically.

Journalists in Conflict: From CollateralDamage to Enemy TargetsIn the age of battlefield warfare, journalists faceddifferent challenges than they do today. The“father of modern war reporting,” Sir William

Howard Russell traveled alongside troops withintheir brigades when he reported from conflicts asvaried as the Crimean War and the American CivilWar11. Russell’s colleagues in the field oftensustained injuries as a result of their presence withcombat troops. For example, Edmund O’Donovan,a correspondent for the Daily News, was killed inSudan in 1883 alongside the military force he wasaccompanying12. In a less tragic case, ArchibaldForbes, another reporter for the Daily News,“suffered a minor leg wound which becamegangrenous, nearly necessitating amputation”during the Battle of Metz in the Franco-Prussianwar13. Journalists were likely to lose limbs, receiveserious flesh wounds, or come back to their homecountries with severe shell shock. All of this wasbecause of the way that war journalism worked vis-à-vis conventional warfare. When two (or more)armies met within a clearly defined battlefield,journalists would accompany the forces to provideimpartial reporting from the scene of the conflict.There would be journalists on both sides and allwere indistinguishable to enemy fire, so journalistsof bygone eras were essentially subject to the samedangers as regular troops.

Little changed with the coming of the twentiethcentury. Although wars were not necessarily foughton battlefields, journalists were still omnipresenton the front lines of conflict. Martha Gellhorn, a“celebrated war correspondent,”14 was present inSpain with US forces in the 1930s. Interestingly,“Gellhorn was seldom given official access by themilitary during her reporting on World WarII. She simply went out on her own”15. WhileGellhorn did take drastic risks by reportingfrom Madrid or London in wartime or bytaking to the skies with the US Air Force, shetook these risks willingly, and should she havebeen injured, this would have been collateraldamage, as journalists were not singled outduring these twentieth century conflicts.

Similarly, Edward R. Murrow, a widely-renownedreporter for CBS during World War II, and the“network’s European director,” insisted upon observingmissions of the British Royal Air Force


and US Air Force during the war.16 Murrowwas adamant, once writing to a friend that “inorder to write or talk about danger, you mustexperience it”17. Like with Martha Gellhorn,Edward Murrow wanted to experience the warfirsthand and to report on it, but any injury thathe would have attained would have been aresult of Axis offenses against the Alliedpowers, and not a direct targeting of Murrow,CBS, or journalists in general.

According to Foerstel, the real problems thatjournalists currently face began to appear “from theearly to the late 1970s”18. The author interviewsnumerous journalists to determine why this is thecase; interestingly, their arguments mostly boildown to the fact that journalists in this time periodbegan to be perceived differently by combatants.One journalist notes that “there was a point in timewhen holding a press card … was at leastsomething of a flak jacket”19. The change, he says,is that enemy combatants stopped seeing journalistsas purveyors and communicators of news but ratheras the enemy. Sometimes, the author tells us,“terrorists” see “journalists as spies or supportersof terrorism”20 from the nations that sent them,such as the United States or other powerful nations.In Foerstel’s interview with Terry Anderson, theCNN reporter who was America’s “longest held[journalistic] hostage” in the 1980s, Mr. Andersonpoignantly explains “we don’t fight normal warsanymore”21. That is to say, it is unclear whocombatants, civilians, and other interested partiesare. When journalists are thrown into this mix, thescenario becomes even more complex and it isunfortunate but not surprising that journalists havebeen misinterpreted as the enemy. In addition tothis, as is explored in the next section, the ease withwhich information can now be controlled hasadded to the desire of combatants to attackjournalists, thereby preventing information frombeing transmitted. Indeed, in their book,Journalists Under Fire, Tumber and Webster citethis phenomenon:

The job of frontline journalists is … gettingmore difficult and dangerous. Boundaries

between combatants can be vague, andjournalists find themselves on the receivingend of missiles … and may be targeted forkidnap[ping] … because of their appearanceor because they point their cameras at aninappropriate object. … [Additionally,journalists] can be difficult to control fromthe perspective of perception managers.22

Journalists, therefore, even if they intend to beobjective, bear the occupational hazard ofbeing seen as subjective. And as a result, theirreporting is made unwelcome and they asindividuals are targeted.

Reporting in “Peacetime”: Freedom ofthe PressWhile journalists experience violence anddangers in conflict, they are most certainly notimmune from danger when outside of conflict.This section examines the dangers thatjournalists face in everyday life.

Journalistic freedoms have had a mixed andlong history. Some nations offer almostcomplete immunity to journalists (and havedone so for many years), while others targetjournalists and prevent them from bringingtruth to light. According to the think tankFreedom House, Finland is one of the ‘freest’countries in the world for journalists to workin23. This is due to Finland’s longstandinghistory of freedom of the press, which isembodied in Section 12 of its constitution:

Everyone has the freedom of expression.Freedom of expression entails the right toexpress, disseminate and receive information,opinions and other communications withoutprior prevention by anyone. More detailedprovisions on the exercise of the freedom ofexpression are laid down by an Act. …

Documents and recordings in the possession ofthe authorities are public, unless theirpublication has for compelling reasons beenspecifically restricted by an Act. Everyone has


the right of access to public documents andrecordings.24

In such an environment, journalists are free toreport on practically anything, as long as it doesnot interfere with national security; in otherwords, freedom of the press is almost sacrosanct.This has been the case in Finland for centuriesnow. Nearly 250 years ago, the Swedish Dietvoted for His Majesty’s Gracious OrdinanceRelating to the Freedom of Writing and of thePress thereby allowing “citizens the freedom ofwriting, freedom of the press, and in addition thefreedom of information, public access to officialdocuments. Sweden (including Finland at thattime), was the first country in the world toincorporate a Freedom of Information Act in itsconstitution”25 (Rydholm 46). Other countriesfollowed suit, for example, the United States,which in 1791 ratified the Bill of Rights, whosefirst amendment to the Constitution reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting anestablishment of religion, or prohibiting thefree exercise thereof; or abridging the freedomof speech, or of the press; or the right of thepeople peaceably to assemble, and to petitionthe Government for a redress of grievances.26

As a result, there exists in some countries a stronghistory of protecting a free flow of information.

Concurrently, there are nations that have formany years restricted the freedom of journaliststo report and continue to do so at present. Onesuch example is post-Soviet Russia. In TerryGould’s book, Marked for Death, the story of afamous Russian journalist, Anna Politkovskaya,who was brutally murdered for her work, isretold. During the retelling, the author providesan anecdote that accurately describes the state ofmedia affairs in Russia:

Before Putin’s ascension to power, NTV hadbeen an independent station that had producedthe best investigative news shows in Russia,exposing government corruption and

bringing the Chechen war into the homesof Russians. In April 2001, Putin, unhappywith NTV’s coverage of himself and thewar, had its studios raided by a SWATteam, pulled it off the air, engineered itsacquisition by the government’s energycorporation … and driven its owner … intoexile. Variety shows and positive-spin newswere now [the station]’s usual fare.27

Therefore, in Russia, reporting became mostlycontrolled by the government and journalistswould have difficult exposing corruption. Gouldalso writes about the “krysha” or “roof”28protection that corrupt parties in Russia maintain.In fact, “all reporters understood that anyonewho exposed the excesses of krysha could bemurdered with impunity by those who possessedthat krysha”29. And so, Gould’s examination ofPolitkovskaya’s death circles around these twofacts. The investigative journalist, a brightwoman with a bitter enmity toward her nation’sgovernment, was “shot dead in her apartmentbuilding”30 for overreaching with herinvestigations and attempts to expose corruption.Interestingly, “the story dominated the hourlycycle on the BBC World Service. [Meanwhile,]the Russian stations gave it [only] a minute”31.

As is evinced by the various examples citedabove, there exists a broad spectrum in the worldof acceptance, or lack thereof, of journalists andinvestigative reporting. Some nations greatlyvalue a free press and journalists’ ability to carryout their work, even if it means potentially badpress for the government. On the other hand,numerous nations—and Russia is solely oneexample—place value on journalists’ headsrather than valuing their work.

After examining some specific examples of nations andthe worth they ascribe to journalism, it is necessary tosurvey the history of journalists’ rights on a global scale.While more specific interventions and actions used todefend journalists will be examined later, one of thefirst is examined here, in line with this being the historysection.


In 1948, after the end of World War II, the UnitedNations held a conference on the Freedom ofInformation worldwide. The aim of this conferencewas to codify information flow in a post-Nazi andpost-Fascist world. This became particularlypertinent following the conference when many newnations began to form out of independencemovements in the mid-twentieth century. Whilesome draft issues were not included in the finalresolutions of the conference, the delegates did callfor a number of important actions to be taken,including, among others:

• “That everyone shall have the right tofreedom of thought and expression …[including the] freedom to hold opinionswithout interference”32

• “Governments should encourage the freestpossible movement of foreign correspondentsin the performance of their functions”33

• “that no … foreign news personnel …legally admitted to a foreign territoryshould be expelled on account of anyexercise … of [their] right to seek, receiveand impart information or opinion”34

This convention drew a solid and clear baselinefrom which to begin examining the dangers thatjournalists encounter in their work; however,more work was left after its conclusion.

In sum, the history of the journalistic professionvis-à-vis other world actors is complex andmultifaceted. One major takeaway from thissection is that journalism has never been an easyprofession and that journalists have always facedthreats, even if indirect ones, throughout theperformance of their work. Whether receiving abattle wound or illness from covering a war, beingkidnapped by Al Qaeda, or being poisoned by anation’s intelligence agency, journalists face someof the greatest occupational hazards in the world.What has changed, as of late, though, is thatjournalists are facing more of these threats and arebeing singled out among other civilians in bothtimes of war and peace. Specific examples of thesechanges are cited in the next section of this guide.

Finally, it is crucial to consider national attitudestowards journalism and journalists as well.History has shown that different types ofgovernments come out in support of a free pressjust as those same types of governments maysupport a limited, government-controlled press(e.g. not all democracies support the practice of afree press). In our ever-more-globalized world,some people take the ability to receive newsfrom a variety of independent sources to be agiven right; however, we must humble ourselvesand remember that it is in fact a privilege that notevery human being receives. Thus, journalisticfreedom is a commodity available to few but notheralded enough by supporters of freedom of thepress throughout the world.

Current Situation

The Changing Nature of the GameThe nature of the journalistic profession haschanged drastically in recent history. Whereas warcorrespondents were previously regarded as heroicprofessionals striving to keep the civilian massesinformed, today’s men and women reporting fromthe battlefield have become targets themselves35.Since 1992, 1118 journalists have been killed whilepracticing their craft1. Additionally, 456 journalists2have been forced into exile since June 1, 2008.36Both of these figures come from the Committee toProtect Journalists, an advocacy group that “wasfounded in 1981 by a group of U.S. correspondentswho realized they could not ignore the plight ofcolleagues whose reporting put them in peril on adaily basis”37.

Such a shift in attitudes towards the press isintrinsically linked with changes in the waywar is fought and information is disseminated.In their book about protecting journalists whileon duty, Lisosky and Henrichsen tell us:

The life of the international correspondent has been transformed … Conflicts 60 years

1 Figure current as of 24 February 20152 Figure current as of 24 February 2015


ago were vastly different. Reporters took greatrisks but not the same risks as today’s frontlinejournalists. While reporting from thebattlefront in the last century, the journalisttook the chance of being injured by a straybullet. They were often seen as … risking theirlives to tell stories of the atrocities of war. Inearlier conflicts, journalists were enlisted bycombatants … to proclaim injustices andchallenge the motivations of war. But thefrontlines of today’s conflicts are virtual andviral. Many … clashes in today’s new warsinvolve poorly disciplined militias under thecontrol of warlords and ill-trained armedleaders. Combatants have different agendas.Control of territory is not as important ascontrol of information.38

Consequently, the duo reasons:

Control of information has become anincreasingly powerful weapon in the arsenalof global warfare and local disputes. Groupson all sides have learned the importance ofhaving the media on their side … Becausegovernments and combatants around theworld have found an insatiable hunger togenerate positive public opinion, journalistsare often used as the catalyst for this project.… [Moreover,] the terrorizing of journalistshas an added benefit to the insurgent or thecorrupt official or belligerent. Harassing orkilling a journalist has an even greaterrhetorical effect because this move can instillfear in other journalists, as well as plant theseed of fear throughout the regional or globalaudience. As a result, journalists have becomean important target in this corrupt arena.39

Clearly, we no longer live in a world where waris patriotic and idealized and where warcorrespondents risk their lives by reporting thetruth from battlefields thousands of miles away.In today’s geopolitical climate, internal andinternational conflict can break out anywhereand at any time. Due to advances in technology,

communications, and travel, journalists can alsoarrive at and report from scenes of conflict muchfaster than in bygone decades. In locales wherejournalistic freedoms are limited or not the norm,the speed and spontaneity of conflict eruptingand spreading coupled with ease of reportingpose a threat to actors determined to constrict theflow of information. As a result, reporting aboutconflict has placed the press in an extremelyvulnerable position (as purveyors and conduits ofinformation). Powerful actors who dislike thepress’s activities now target their perceivedproblems at the source: journalists in the field.

The Rise of Rebellion—Militias, Juntas, Drug Cartels, and Other Non-State ActorsAs mentioned above in the quotation from Lisoskyand Henrichsen, one of the major differences injournalism that has developed in recent history isthe presence of non-state actors within conflict.Whereas in the past, correspondents in war onlyhad to worry about formal, standing armies (andthe journalists often traveled with these armies,sometimes being attacked alongside soldiers by theenemy), journalists today do not have such a clear-cut division between combatants. The “enemy” intoday’s reporting climate is not a sole aggressorstate; the “enemy” consists of various politicalfactions, corrupt leaders, non-state terroristorganizations, and other groups.

As it is impossible for a journalist to please everysuch actor (let alone every nation embroiled inconflict) with his or her reporting, journalists havedeveloped into targets to prevent the disseminationof subjectively unfavorable but objectivelyimpartial information. Let us examine the casestudy of journalism in Pakistan to further this point.According to the BBC, due to Pakistan’s “three defacto insurgencies,”40 the central government doesnot have control over all of the territory of (andtherefore information flow in) Pakistan. As a result,journalists are often targeted by “militants, politicalparties and the state’s intelligence agencies”41, butit is impossible for journalists to prove who theperpetrators are.


In a surprising move last year, Prime MinisterNawaz Sharif ordered a review of a number ofviolent incidents against journalists and evenachieved a conviction of “six people for the murderin 2011 of Wali Khan Babar, a popular TV reporterin Karachi”42. Prime Minister Sharif promised moreconvictions to come and a clearer way forjournalists to file grievances in the country; thoughit seems that the government may not have takensubstantial enough actions to uphold journalists’safety, given the variety of actors with substantialclout in the country. This claim is evinced in the2014 attack on Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir. On19 April 2014, Mr. Mir was traveling from theairport in Karachi when his car was attacked bygunmen43; interestingly, “Mr. Mir’s brother, aleading investigative journalist… accused the country’s intelligence agency, theISI (Inter-Services Intelligence), of orchestratingthe attack”44 thereby demonstrating that there existmultiple facets to the government and thatPakistan’s intelligence service (if it is indeedresponsible for the attack) was not in agreementwith the Prime Minister’s earlier sentiments. Theother worrisome facet to this case study is that afteraccusations against the ISI became known,“Pakistan’s Electronic Media Regularity Authority… suspended the [license]” of GeoTV, thestation for which Mr. Mir reports and whichaired the accusations against the ISI45.

Another striking case study of an infringement onjournalistic freedom comes from the 1994Rwandan genocide. Twenty years ago, “nearly onemillion people [were] killed in just 100 days” bytheir “neighbors, friends, [and] even … relatives,”all wielding “machetes, clubs, [and] grenades”46.The entire conflict was predicated upon ethnicdifferences in the population between the majorityHutu and minority Tutsi peoples. It is important tonote that the Tutsi, despite being the minority, werethe rulers of Rwanda until the country gained itsindependence from Belgium in 1962. At that point,the Hutu took over the Rwandan government andthere was a sense of disdain, fear, and hatredtoward the Tutsi47. In 1994, when the governmenttook up arms against the

Tutsi and their militia, thousands of Hutu weremobilized to partake in the bloodshed. Part ofthis mobilization occurred at the hands of a freepress. Darryl Li describes the situation as such:

For some 100 days in the spring and summerof 1994, millions of Rwandans witnessed,participated in, or otherwise lived through anationwide campaign of extermination, acollective effort whose rhythm was in manyways regulated by the broadcasts of Radio-Television Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM).“The graves are only half empty; who willhelp us fill them?” an RTLM announcer isreputed to have wondered out loud in one ofthe station’s less subtle moments.48

Indeed, the broadcasts over RTLM’s radio wavesincited thousands of Hutu to partake in thegenocide of the Tutsi minority. This is worrisomebecause “RTLM was … the most popular station inthe country during the genocide, perceived as areliable political barometer, a sourceof entertainment, and a provider of breakingnews”49. As such, a station perceived to be alegitimate source of news and journalism became amechanism to encourage widespread ethniccleansing. While it may appear that RTLM wassimply carrying out the will of its leadership andnot actually infringing on the rights of journalists,this is not the case. Political bias has, does, and willcontinue to exist in news media; however,journalists have a choice as to whether theyparticipate in it or not. Additionally, journalists cantransfer between various press outlets that swayone way or another with their political biases (e.g.in the United States, there is a dichotomy betweenFox News’s reporting and MSNBC’s reporting).During the Rwandan genocide, on the other hand,the two major radio stations to which the Rwandanpopulace had access—RTLM and Radio Rwanda—both broadcasted anti-Tutsi propaganda50 andjournalists did not have a choice about theirreporting; it simply could not go against the partyline.


Figure 1. Reporters Without Borders releases an annual World Press Freedom Index, which categorizes nations throughout the world on their friendliness towards the journalistic professions. This index takes into account freedom of the press laws and violence against journalists.

Most recently, a number of attacks on journalistsby the Islamic State (IS) and its sympathizers havegained prominence in world media. In mid-August2014, IS militants beheaded James Foley, afreelance American journalist who was capturedduring the conflict in Syria in 201251. According toa video IS released of the execution, “Mr. Foley’sexecution [was] in retaliation for … Americanairstrikes ordered by President Obama against theextremist group in Iraq.”52 This suggests that, asmentioned earlier, extremists do view journalists asgovernment agents and not objective observers,thereby leading them to leverage journalists’ livesfor political gain. The world learned all too quicklyafter Mr. Foley’s killing that extremist violenceagainst journalists doesn’t necessarily

need to happen in a warzone and can occur inthe quiet comfort of a protected office buildingin France.

On 7 January 2015, armed gunmen withsympathies to terrorist groups in the Middle Eastperpetrated a terror attack at the headquarters of thesatirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris, killingtwelve journalists and magazine staff53. Themagazine, itself the subject of much mediascrutiny, is known for its provocative and forwarddepictions of religion, prophets, and religiousfanatics. While some of the magazine’s contentmay border on the offensive, many saw the CharlieHebdo attack as a symbol for an overall attack onjournalistic freedom, with some commentators going sofar as to say that religious extremism is


attempting to silence the media54. It is true thatfactors such as religion can influence the stateof press freedom in nations, and this is indeeda consideration when calculating how variousnations treat journalists.

A Colorful Map of the WorldOne of the most pertinent indicators today in theworld of journalism is the World Press FreedomIndex, released annually by Reporters WithoutBorders (see Figure 1). As you can see, the map ofthe Freedom Index presents the world’s nations in acolor scheme that explains the journalistic climatein those nations. Nations marked white and yellowhave a safe climate for journalists, while nations inred or black present problems and dangeroussituations for correspondents. Nations that arerepresented in orange are in the middle—thesituation on the ground for reporters is not ideal,but it could also be worse. What is verytroublesome about this map and about the index asa whole is the lack of white and yellow on the map.This means that the majority of the world’s nationspresent some sort of difficulty for journalists whilethey are carrying out their duties.

Perhaps even more worrying is the fact thatdemocratic, developed nations, which should bespearheading the fight for journalistic freedoms,are often not. For example, the only G7 nationsto have a white or ‘good’ rating are Canada andGermany. If these seven nations strive to be atthe forefront of the world economically and aredetermined to be good leaders by setting strongexamples, then they must also lead the world intreating their journalists well and providing suchclimates that journalists can report withoutfearing invasive censorship or threats to theirpersonal safety. An example of this is the eventsthat occurred in Ferguson, Missouri during thesummer of 2014. After riots and protests brokeout in the town, journalists “flocked to thescene”55 to report on happenings. Even thoughthis took place in the United States, a nation thatis often recognized for its press freedoms,“journalists reported being detained, threatened

or otherwise prevented from covering theunfolding story.”56 If such events are occurring inAmerica, they indubitably occur throughout therest of the world, and the United Nations mustpush for greater common principles that aim toallow journalists to report on the diverse viewsand opinions prevalent in the world today.

Additionally, it is interesting to examine thedemographics of journalists who are subject toviolence, censorship, and fear. Reporters WithoutBorders offers a second visual aid inunderstanding the dangers of this profession (seeFigure 2). This image shows the fate ofjournalists who came under attack in 2013. Thegreen figures display countries where journalistswere jailed while the red figures show countrieswhere journalists were killed. Similarly, it isinteresting to note that violence or intolerance ofjournalists affects male journalists almostexclusively. Violence against journalists does nothave to occur in a conflict area (by a widemargin); and the journalists who are targeted areoverwhelmingly staff of news outlets, therebycorroborating the idea that the perpetrators ofcrimes against journalists do view them aspromulgating the ideas of their respective bosses.

In sum, the current climate of freedom of the pressis not bright. Journalists are intimidated bypotential harassment, harm, or death in carrying outtheir reporting, and various states and non-stateactors are able to manipulate the flow ofinformation to the world by means of thisintimidation. With the ever-growing web presenceof the world’s citizenry and the ability to postonline by almost anyone, reliable and honestsources of news information are remaining asimportant as ever. The status quo that journalistsface is not conducive to reliable news mediapermeating the televisions, computers, andnewspapers of the world, and something must bedone to ensure that people stay informed byjournalists who stay alive and free.


Relevant UN ActionsThe amount of past international action regarding protections and freedoms for journalists is

One incredible important past international actionis that of the Third Geneva Convention. During theThird Convention, the status of Prisoners of War(POWs) was debated and persons who are

Figure 2. This infographic the world’s most dangerous countries for journalists to report from in terms of journalists killed and journalists jailed. It also provides some interesting statistics describing targeted reporters.

alarmingly small considering the magnitude ofthe problem. While groups like ReportersWithout Borders and the Committee to ProtectJournalists may put pressure on governmentsand international bodies, the process is slowand journalists continue to be targeted whilenot enough is being done to protect them.

One of the earliest international actions on thesubject was the aforementioned GenevaConference on the Freedom of Information in1948. While few concrete action steps came outof those proceedings, a universal declaration onthe importance of the free flow of informationwas made. Nations were encouraged to protectjournalists and allow them and information freetransit. Additionally, the conference’s resolutionsmaintained that access to information is a basichuman right.

able to fall into the POW category were defined.Among them, in Article 4 of the Convention, are“war correspondents”57. Similarly, in the ProtocolAddition to the Third Convention, there is amore extensive list of “measures of protectionfor journalists” which constituted Article 7958 ofthe Protocol Addition:

1.Journalists engaged in dangerous professionalmissions in areas of armed conflict shall beconsidered as civilians within the meaning ofArticle 50, paragraph 1.

2.They shall be protected as such under theConventions and this Protocol, provided that theytake no action adversely affecting their status ascivilians, and without prejudice to the right of warcorrespondents accredited to the armed forces tothe status provided for in Article 4 A (4) of the ThirdConvention.


3.They may obtain an identity card … This card,which shall be issued by the government of theState of which the journalist is a national or inwhose territory he resides or in which the newsmedium employing him is located, shall attestto his status as a journalist.

This action by the delegates of the GenevaConvention was incredibly important. Firstly, itclarified that journalists are civilians and that anyand all crimes against a journalist qualify as crimesagainst civilians. This is an important definition inthe twenty first century, when many crimes againstjournalists go uninvestigated and untried. Wouldthe same occur for other civilians? Additionally, thejournalistic identification badge or card is one ofthe most important documents that a journalistreceives. Much like HMUN India staff badgesafford their holders a unique status, pressidentification cards are meant to inform others ofthe bearer’s civilian and protected status.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC)addressed violence against journalists at one of itsmeetings in December 2006. In passing UNSCResolution 173859, the Council set up violence againstjournalism as a serious global problem that must beaddressed by society. The resolution begins byrecognizing past actions condemning violence againstcivilians but goes further by specifying that it refersto a concrete type of civilian: a journalist. In itsoperative clauses, however, the resolution is fairlyweak. It “condemns … attacks against journalists,”“recalls … that journalists … shall be considered ascivilians,”60 and basically calls on states to investigatecrimes against journalists and the impunity ofperpetrators, another major problem in today’sreporting world. One of the more important operativeclauses in this resolution is number 10, which reads,“Invites States which have not yet done so to considerbecoming parties to the Additional Protocols I and IIof 1977 to the Geneva Conventions at the earliestpossible date”61. By calling on states to do this, theUN is essentially ensuring that more states will agreeto the three clauses listed earlier, and will be legally

obligated to recognize journalists’ status andtheir resulting protections.

The Human Rights Council also adopted aninteresting resolution on the safety of journalists.In resolution 21/12, the HRC echoes many ofUNSC’s calls from its 2006 resolution. Oneimportant operative clause stands out, however:operative clause 12. This clause reads:

Requests the office of United Nations HighCommissioner for Human Rights, incollaboration with the Special Rapporteur onthe promotion and protection of the right tofreedom of opinion and expression, toprepare, working in consultation with Statesand other relevant stakeholders, thecompilation of good practices in theprotection of journalists, the prevention ofattacks and the fight against impunity forattacks committed against journalists, and topresent the compilation reports to the HumanRights Council at its twenty-fourth session.62

This is an important step forward because itaddresses the issue of impunity and requests theSpecial Rapporteur to examine it in detail. Whilestopping violence against journalists isimportant, it will never be achieved if the peopleresponsible are not held accountable for theircrimes. As such, it is as important to determinehow to prevent violence as it is to determine howto prosecute perpetrated violence.

The Special Rapporteur’s investigation waspresented to the HRC and that also helpedinform the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO)’s “UN Plan of Action on the Safetyof Journalists and the Issue of Impunity.” ThisPlan calls for intergovernmental cooperation intracking violence against journalists, as well asthe creation of mechanisms to train and“sensitize” journalists and other stakeholders tothe dangers facing them in their work63.

Finally, the most recent action on the internationalstage about journalists’ safety was passed by


this very body: the Third Committee of theUnited Nations. Resolution A/C.3/68/L.40/ Rev.1contains a number of significant operativeclauses. The two most important raise awarenessof journalists’ plight. Operative clause 2 “decidesto proclaim 2 November as the International Dayto End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists”64and operative clause 8 “requests the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at itssixty-ninth session on the implementation of thepresent resolution”65. Both of these measures arepushing the safety of journalists into theforefront of diplomats’ and government leaders’minds, thus truly highlighting it as an importantworld issue.

Timeline• 1820-1907—Life dates of Sir William

Howard Russell, “the father of modern warreporting”

• 24 October 1945—UN Established• 23 March to 21 April 1948—UN

Conference on the Freedom of Information,Geneva, Switzerland: access to informationis codified as a basic human right; nationsare encouraged to permit journalists accessto report and transmit without hindrance

• 1949—Third Geneva Convention: Reportersaccredited to be alongside armies enjoy theright of being treated as POWs if captured

• 8 June 1977—Additional Protocols I and IIto Geneva Conventions adopted: journalistsare officially defined as civilians and areafforded all the same rights; journalistsencouraged to carry press identification cards

• 16 March 1985-4 December 1991—TerryAnderson held hostage in Lebanon: animportant reporter for CNN, Anderson washeld hostage for over six years. Thismarked a shift toward the direct targetingof reporters in the field

• 1 February 2002—Daniel Pearl, US journalistfor Wall Street Journal beheaded in Pakistan:

one of the most grave killings of ajournalist abroad, under the pretense thatPearl was a “spy” for the US Government66

• December 2006—UNSC resolution 1738passed: first time the UNSC addresses thethreats against journalists directly,condemning violence and calling on statesto investigate properly

• November 2013—Third Committee passesresolution on journalists: impunity of violenceagainst journalists and violence itself arebrought to the forefront of UN proceedings andhighlighted as a major world issue

• 7 January 2015—Two gunmen enter theParis offices of Charlie Hebdo—a Frenchsatire publication—and kill eleven people,nine journalists and two support staff

Proposed SolutionsIn their book War on Words: Who Should ProtectJournalists, Lisosky and Henrichsen discuss manycalls for change that aim to help journalists reportfrom around the world. A number of these will bediscussed here; however, this is not an exhaustivelist and does not include the past internationalactions discussed earlier. Moreover, in confrontingsuch a loaded and important topic, creativity insolutions is important and this creativity will onlycome from outside research in conjunction withsolutions proposed here.

According to the Lisosky and Henrichsen, “in2003, the International Federation of Journalists(IFJ) called for a UN resolution that would providethe same protections to journalists as currentlyexist for aid workers”67. One of the protectionsafforded to aid workers but not to journalistsspecifically is that “attacks … directed againstpersonnel involved in a humanitarian assistancemission … in situations of armed conflictsconstitute war crimes”68. This is a solid proposal onbehalf of the IFJ. Journalists and aid workers, whilecarrying out different missions, both have noble aims:to help the public. Journalists do not provide care towar-stricken populations;


however, they provide awareness that can begetsuch care and humanitarian aid. When journalistsare properly embedded in a conflict zone (that is,it is evident that they are civilians), it would be asuccessful option to lobby further for them tobear the same protections as aid workers.

Another strategy that has been proposed is theDaniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act that waspassed in the United States. Named for theAmerican-Israeli journalist who was murdered inPakistan in 2002 (see Figure 3), the act requiresthe United States Department of State to solicitinformation on crimes against journalists through

Figure 3. Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter killed in Pakistan in 2002.

its various international bureaus and then tomake this information public, thereby puttingpressure on nations that allow crimes againstjournalists to occur and to go unpunished69.While in theory this is a novel idea that couldprove to be embarrassing for some governments,“it is unclear what, if anything”70 this act hasachieved through documenting and publishinginformation on crimes against journalists.

A similar strategy to the one adopted by the UnitedStates is that adopted by various advocacy groups:“name and shame”71. Groups like

Reporters Without Borders compile and publishnames of journalists and media workers who havebeen harassed, harmed, or killed and publishinformation surrounding these crimes. They intendto shame the perpetrators and the countries wherethe crimes occur and are often successful at puttingpressure on the United Nations to makedeclarations. Unfortunately, the UN’s declarationsare less successful at combatting this violence thanother possible avenues.

Two of the most innovative and reasonablesuggestions for how to combat violence againstjournalists come from journalists themselves:Daniel Pearl, and Chris Cramer, the “global editorfor multimedia at Reuters and formerly director of… the BBC”72. Pearl, after returning “from theBalkans in 1999 … composed a detailed document… [that] offered a number of safety measures tomanage risk for journalists and editors coveringconflict”73. These strategies ranged fromestablishing communication avenues for journalistsin the field together to ensuring that checkingaccounts with cash advances are ready foremergency situations to ascertaining thatemergency equipment and assault training wereprovided to journalists74. These are all fantasticstrategies that really put journalists in control ofany situation they may find themselves in. Whilethey may not carry firearms and would be hard-fetched to defend themselves sans weapon ifcornered by a militia, emergency preparedness andassault training for journalists prior to assignmentdeployment may provide journalists with the skillsto find an out if captured or with the survivaltactics to stay alive until help arrives. Lisosky andHenrichsen write that Pearl’s widow “noted in herbook that, unfortunately for Daniel, [his]suggestions were [never] adopted”75.

Cramer, meanwhile, created a set of guidelines forhis correspondents at the BBC that are incrediblyshrewd and should be applicable to journalistsreporting throughout the entire world. Aftersuffering dismay at his staff’s decision to pull outof the Balkan conflict due to safety concerns,Cramer realized that “his shortsightedness made


him a lousy manager”76 and he created the following guidelines:

• “No story [is] worth a life;• No picture sequence [is] worth an injury;• No piece of audio or video [is] worth

endangering our staff members.”77In times of danger or conflict, journalists may feela rush of adrenaline that pushes them to bring thetruth to light and to uncover conspiracies andcorruption; however, Cramer’s guidelines areabsolutely right. No amount of corruption is wortha journalist losing her life; it is necessary to reportfrom the front lines to bring in the most accuratestory, but it is also important to look out for one’sself in reporting. Cramer’s guidelines should beestablished by news agencies everywhere to ensurethat journalists are doing the maximum possible toprevent themselves from being targets.

Ultimately, blank calls for action must be replacedwith more concrete ideas to ensure that violenceagainst journalists can be quelled. While somestrategies may work more effectively than others,the United Nations must work with all thenecessary stakeholders (nations, non-state actors,news agencies, journalists themselves, etc.) toensure journalists’ safety in the field, especiallyconsidering how varied field conditions can be,geopolitically speaking.

Bloc PositionsPlease note that these bloc positions are notexhaustive and do not include the full informationon every country in the world. I encourage you tothink about the problems facing journalists usingcreative and out-of-the-box thinking and workingalongside the bloc positions presented here, notentirely within them, but not departing entirelyfrom them either.

Scandinavia: Denmark, Norway, Sweden; Finland and Iceland

All Scandinavian countries have a long and solidhistory of encouraging freedom of informationand freedom of the press. As such, these nationsuphold journalistic protections in their highestdegree and take a powerful stand when it comesto protecting journalists, their right todisseminate information, and any associatedrights or freedoms. Not surprisingly, all of thesenations have a ‘white’ rating from ReportersWithout Borders. These nations have all takenaction to protect journalism within their bordersby having incredibly strong press freedom laws.

Countries of the former Soviet Union: Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc.; Cuba and Democratic People’s Republic KoreaAs either formerly or currently communist nations,these countries often present difficult reportingclimates for journalists. Not every former nation ofthe Soviet Union currently aligns itself with Russiaand this alignment or lack thereof dictates internalmedia bias. The DPRK and Cuba fit into thiscategory because they are highly reclusive nations,permitting few to no foreign journalists entry orpermission to report. The potential for censorshipor victimization of journalists is fairly significant inthese nations.

Australia, United Kingdom, United Statesof America; Japan and Republic of KoreaThese are all highly developed, industrial nationsthat afford a large amount of protection tojournalists in the performance of their duties. Inspite of this, not one of these countries bears a‘white’ rating from Reporters Without Borders (seeFigure 1). This can be due to a number of causes;for example, the United Kingdom does notconstitutionally grant protections to journalists78,or as another example, given its defense interests, theUnited States reserves the right to use its vastespionage apparatus to prevent certain informationfrom being reported. All of these nations stand forstrong press freedom, and the US in its aid work “holdsgovernments


accountable to their human rights obligations,”which include media freedom79.

Maghreb: Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania;Middle East: Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Gulf States, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Turkey; Central Asia: Afghanistan and Pakistan

These countries include a number ofauthoritarian states, where freedom of the pressis hard to come by, or official on paper only.These countries are also among the mostdangerous for journalists to report from80. Thesenations may sign on to UN treaties and chartersconcerning the protection of journalists, but theirinternal ratification or enforcement may bequestionable. As with the earlier case study onGeoTV, journalists in these nations havesignificant reason to fear for their lives whenattempting to uncover government wrongdoing.

Southeast Asia and India

These nations tend to have strong governmentalmedia bias. As a result, the freedom ofjournalists to transmit and report information isinfringed upon. For example, in the Jammu andKashmir region, media members are unable toaccess certain sites81. Similarly, in China, themain source of print news media is from thestate-run People’s Daily, thereby ensuring that agovernment source is the most popular source forthe flow of information. Many of these nationsare also either newly exposed to or notdemocracies and encourage censorship, which isdetrimental for news agencies and reporters. Forinstance, Myanmar until very recently did notallow images of or stories about activist AungSan Suu Kyi in its press (see Figure 4).

Canada and Western EuropeThese countries are generally considered to beextremely safe for journalists. There are noimmediate dangers to journalists’ lives, and thereexists a wide array of conduits for journalists to

Figure 4. Rickshaw drivers in Myanmar relax and read the morning newspapers, which are now significantly more diverse in their messaging than just a few years ago.


report through. The Charlie Hebdo incident,however, suggests that these countries too arenot entirely risk-free.

Central and South AmericaThe reporting climate in these countries is veryvaried and it is difficult to group them intosmaller blocs with more concrete information asa result. In general, these countries are morestable politically than some of the other countriesthat pose dangers for journalists; however, non-state actors within these nations sometimes makeit difficult for journalists to report. A particularproblem that is encountered in this region is thenarcotics trade, whose perpetrators may pursuejournalists.

Relevant PartnersThere are a number of relevant internationalpartners whose expertise will be important in yourdebate and resolution drafting. The Committee toProtect Journalists (CPJ), Reporters WithoutBorders (RSF), and the International News SafetyInstitute (INSI), are three big-name organizationsthat are a resource for journalists and newsorganizations throughout the world. CPJ and RSFmostly report on press freedom restrictions(including violence) and both publish annualsurveys and indices on the status of journalism indifferent nations. INSI, in addition to providinginformation on casualties and dangers of reporting,provides journalists with resources, vendors,training centers, and other information to help themtravel and report more safely.

Another important partner is the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The ICRCmonitors international conflicts and is the leadingorganization that promotes the adherence to theGeneva Conventions and their AdditionalProtocols. As such, the ICRC is extremelyconcerned with the status of civilians during armedconflict. Given journalists’ civilian status, theICRC is there to “protect the lives and dignity

of victims of armed conflict and other situations ofviolence and to provide them with assistance.”82

There exist numerous other, smaller, organizationswhose missions are to protect and upholdjournalists’ rights and safety in conflict areas.Oftentimes, these organizations will focus onparticular regions of the world or on particulartypes of conflict. As such, it is impossible to listthem all here; however, specific organizations mayprove to be useful in the implementation of thiscommittee’s resolutions and it would be beneficialto be acquainted with some of them.

Questions A Resolution Must Answer

1. What specific actions steps can be taken:

• By journalists to ensure that they remain out of harm’s way?

• By news outlets to ensure that theirjournalists are well protected but also ableto be at the front lines?

• By governments to ensure safe passage,freedom of communication, and ability todisseminate information, even if it portraysthe government in a negative light?

• By international organizations to encouragenational compliance with previousagreements (e.g. Geneva Conventions andAdditional Protocols) with regards tokeeping journalists safe?

2.How can governments and internationalorganizations rein in the impunity currentlyenjoyed by many perpetrators of violenceagainst journalists?

3.Why is the safety of journalists soimportant to having an informed citizenrythroughout the world?

4.How can national legislation be balanced so as toprovide journalists with enough freedom to reporton important issues while also defending agovernment’s right to protect its citizens andcertain national security interests from the publiceye?


5.What intra-United Nations activities can becarried out to further the importance ofpursuing journalistic freedom in the world?

6. What steps can be taken by the UnitedNations to encourage states that haveratified treaties on journalistic safety buthave done this in name only to implementmore stringent policies?

Suggestions for Further ResearchWhile this study guide is a good place to beginyour research, it by no means contains acomprehensive history or analysis of every eventpertaining to journalistic freedoms and protections.As such, the case studies in this guide are ones thatI found easily accessible, interesting, and pertinentto this committee; however, in the course of yourresearch you should search for case studiespertaining to your nation, your partners and allies,and your enemies too. You can easily find suchcase studies on the websites of Reporters WithoutBorders (http://en.rsf.org), the Committee toProtect Journalists (http://cpj.org), or FreedomHouse (http://freedomhouse.org).

News organizations take violence against their ownfairly seriously, and you should take this intoaccount when doing your research. For example, ifyou were researching the murder of Daniel Pearl,The Wall Street Journal would have had a vestedinterest in reporting on its kidnapped journalist. Atpresent, the BBC generally devotes a decentamount of its coverage to injustices committedtowards journalists.

Finally, I highly suggest borrowing a hard copyof a book on the topic from your local or schoollibrary. All of the books that are cited in thisstudy guide contain a wealth of information onthe topic, and there were many more that Iconsidered but did not end up reading. Thesebooks can provide you with a longer history andexamination of pertinent case studies than existsin this guide, and will give you a good groundinggoing into committee.

Position Paper Requirements

All delegations are expected to write a positionpaper on the topic area. The position paper isintended as an exercise to stimulate participants’ideas before attending committee, and oftenserves as a diving-off point for delegates makingopening speeches before their colleagues.

The standard position paper follows a veryformulaic three-paragraph format. The firstparagraph should summarize what the delegatesees as the problem at hand. In other words,the first paragraph should be an explanation ofthe topic area in the delegate’s own words. Thesecond paragraph should explain the delegate’snation’s viewpoint on the problem. What is thenation’s foreign policy vis-à-vis the problem?Has the nation dealt with particular instancesof the problem in the past? Finally, the thirdparagraph should be an idea or proposal forhow the delegate’s nation would deal with theissue— potential solutions or new methods forsolving the issue would go here.

The position paper should be typed in standard12-point font with one-inch margins and shouldnot be longer than two pages double-spaced. Atthe top left corner of the first page, the delegateshould make sure to include his/her name,school, committee name, and country position.

Closing Remarks

Delegates,

I hope that this study guide proved to be a usefulbeginning for your research in preparation ofHarvard Model United Nations India 2015! I amsincerely looking forward to meeting you all in


August and seeing all of your hard work cometo fruition at conference.

I want to remind you of a couple factors thatyou ought to keep in mind as you prepare forconference:

• I have listed a number of proposed solutionsfor the topic in this guide; however, pleaseremember that these are by far not the onlysolutions to the problems at hand.

• It is best not to get caught up in specific eventsof violence against journalists or infringementon journalistic freedoms—these episodesshould serve as an impetus to change; circulardebate on the causes or effects of a specificepisode do not move the committee forward.

As always, if you have any questions about thetopics or anything pertaining to SOCHUM orHMUN India 2015, please feel free to get intouch with me! I am more than happy toanswer any and all questions that you have.Best of luck with conference preparations andsee you in a few short months!

Best,

Victor

Roth, Mitchel. Historical Dictionary of WarJournalism. Westport, CT, Greenwood, 1997.

Tumber, Howard, and Frank Webster.Journalists Under Fire: Information War andJournalistic Practices. London, Sage, 2006.

Freedom House website, 2013.

Finland. Ministry of Justice. The Constitutionof Finland. Helsinki, 1999.

Rydholm, Lena. “China and the World’s FirstFreedom of Information Act: the SwedishFreedom of the Press Act of 1766.” Javnost—the Public, 2013.

United States. Congress of the United States.Bill of Rights. New York, 1791.

Gould, Terry. Marked for Death: Dying for theStory in the World’s Most Dangerous Places.Berkeley, Counterpoint, 2009.

United Nations. United Nations Conference onFreedom of Information. Final Act of theUnited Nations Conference on Freedom ofInformation. Geneva, United Nations, 1948.

Lisosky, Joanne, and Jennifer Henrichsen. Waron Words: Who Should Protect Journalists?Santa Barbara, CA, Praeger, 2011.

Bibliography

Merriam-Webster. “Journalism.” Merriam-Webster

Foerstel, Herbert. Killing the Messenger.Westport, CT, Praeger, 2006.

Committee to Protect Journalists. “JournalistsKilled in Iraq.” Committee to ProtectJournalists, 2014.

Newseum. “Journalists Memorial.” Newseum.2014.

Committee to Protect Journalists website, 2014.

Lynch, Jake. A Global Standard for ReportingConflict. New York, Routledge, 2014.

BBC news, various, 2014.

Morton, Adam. “The War on Drugs in Mexico:a failed state?” Third World Quarterly, 2012.

White, Dean. “An African Holocaust.” HistoryToday, 2014.

Li, Darryl. “Echoes of violence: considerationson radio and genocide in Rwanda.” Journal ofGenocide Research, 2004.

Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human RightsStudies website.


United Nations. Geneva Convention of 1949. Hudson, Miles, and John Stanier. War and the Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Media. Thrupp, UK: Sutton, 1997. Prisoners of War.Geneva, United Nations, 1949.

United Nations. Protocol Additional to the GenevaConventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to theProtection of Victims of International ArmedConflicts (Protocol I). United Nations, 1977.

United Nations. Security Council. Resolution1738. New York, United Nations, 2006.

United Nations. Human Rights Council.Resolution 21/12. Safety of journalists. NewYork, United Nations, 2012.

United Nations. United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization. UN Plan ofAction on the Safety of Journalists and the Issueof Impunity. New York, United Nations, 2012.

(Endnotes)1 United Nations. Third Committee of the GeneralAssembly. Third Committee: Social, Humanitarian andCultural Questions. Summary Record of Meetings.(A/C.3/1). United Nations: New York,1946. Print.

2 Ibid.

3 United Nations. United Nations. 20 UNChronicle. United Nations: New York, 1983. Web. 11October 2014. HeinOnline.

United Nations. Third Committee. Safety ofjournalists and the issue of impunity. NewYork, United Nations, 2013.

Pellegrini, Frank. “Daniel Pearl: 1963-2002.”TIME 21 February 2002.

United Nations. Security Council. Resolution1502. New York, United Nations, 2003.

Anderson, Harry, and Russ Dallen. “Farewellto a free press?” Newsweek 16 August 1990.

IIP Digital. “Press Freedom a Human Right,Moral Necessity, U.S. Officials Say.” U.S.Department of State, 2014.

Reporters Without Borders website, 2014.

Noorani, A. “Academic Freedom and Kashmir.”Economic and Political Weekly, 2001-2.

International Committee of the Red Crosswebsite.

Gutman, Roy, and David Rieff. Crimes of War:What the Public Should Know. New York:WW Norton, 1999.

4 General Assembly of the United Nations. “Rulesof Procedure.” United Nations. Web. 11 October 2014.

5 United Nations Human Rights. “SpecialProcedures of the Human Rights Council.” Office of theHigh Commissioner for Human Rights. 2014. Web. 11October 2014.

6 General Assembly of the United Nations.“Social, Humanitarian & Cultural—Third Committee.”United Nations. 2014. Web. 11 October 2014.

7 “Journalism.” Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster. Web. 29 June 2014.

8 Foerstel, Herbert. Killing the Messenger. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2006. Print. 28


9 Committee to Protect Journalists. “JournalistsKilled in Iraq.” Committee to Protect Journalists. 2014.

21 Foerstel 83.Web. 29 June 2014.

10

Newseum. “Journalists Memorial.” Newseum.22 Tumber, Howard, and Frank Webster. Journalists

Under Fire: Information War and Journalistic Practices.2014. Web. 29 June 2014.

23 Freedom House. “Finland.” Freedom House.

11 Roth, Mitchel. Historical Dictionary of War 2014. Web. 12 March 2015. Journalism. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1997. Print. 265-6.

12

Roth 222.24 Finland. Ministry of Justice. The Constitution of

Finland. Helsinki: 1999. Web. 29 June 2014.

13

14

Roth 106.

25 Rydholm, Lena. “China and the World’s FirstFreedom of Information Act: the Swedish Freedom of the

Foerstel 3.Press Act of 1766.” Javnost—the Public 20.4 (2013): 45-

65. Web. 29 June 2014. 46.

15

16

Ibid.

Foerstel 9.

26 United States. Congress of the United States. Billof Rights. New York: 1791. Web. 30 June 2014.

17 Persico, Joseph. Edward R. Murrow: anAmerican Original. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988.Print. 220. Cited in Foerstel 9.

27 Gould, Terry. Marked for Death: Dying for theStory in the World’s Most Dangerous Places. Berkeley:Counterpoint, 2009. Print. 156.

18

19

20

Foerstel 82.28

Ibid.29

Foerstel 81.30

Gould 151.

Gould 153.

Gould 157.


31 Ibid. 42 Ibid.

32 United Nations. United Nations Conference onFreedom of Information. Final Act of the United NationsConference on Freedom of Information. Geneva: UnitedNations, 1948. HeinOnline. Web. 28 June 2014. 21

43 “Hamid Mir wounded in Pakistan gun attack.”BBC 19 April 2014. Web. 18 June 2014.

33 UN Conference on Freedom of Information 25.

34 UN Conference on Freedom of Information 26.

35 Lisosky, Joanne, and Jennifer Henrichsen. Waron Words: Who Should Protect Journalists? SantaBarbara, CA: Praeger, 2011. Print. 26.

36 Committee to Protect Journalists. “PressFreedom Online.” Committee to Protect Journalists.2014. Web. 30 June 2014.

37 Committee to Protect Journalists. “Our History –About CPJ.” Committee to Protect Journalists. 2014. Web.9 June 2014.

44 Ibid.

45 “Leading Pakistani Geo TV channel is orderedoff air.” BBC 6 June 2014. Web. 18 June 2014.

46 White, Dean. “An African Holocaust.” HistoryToday 64.6 (2014): 40-6. Web. 22 June 2014. 40.

47 White 42.

48 Li, Darryl. “Echoes of violence: considerationson radio and genocide in Rwanda.” Journal of GenocideResearch 6.1 (2004): 9-27. Web. 22 June 2014. 9.

49 Ibid.

38

39

Lisosky and Henrichsen xix.50 Montreal Institute for Genocide and HumanRights Studies. “RwandaRadioTranscripts.” Concordia

Lisosky and Henrichsen xix-xx. University. Web. 22 June 2014.

40 “Pakistan in pledge to protect journalists.” BBC28 March 2014. Web. 18 June 2014.

41 Ibid.

51 Rukmini Callimachi. “Militant Group Says ItKilled American Journalist in Syria.” The New YorkTimes. Web. 12 March 2015.