admin 17 January 2010 Recent News One Comment

The International News Safety Institute urges journalists in the Philippines to resist calls to carry guns following the horrific massacre in Maguindanao.

INSI believes that the safety of journalists would not be improved, and in fact probably would be diminished, were they to carry weapons.

“Journalists increasingly are being targeted largely because they have lost, in the eyes of certain elements, their status as neutral observers. If they bear arms they reinforce this misguided belief by placing themselves on one side or another,” said INSI Director Rodney Pinder.

“A journalist with a gun says some people in the situation I’m covering are my enemies and I am prepared to kill them if necessary. That is not the position of a neutral civilian.”

Most importantly, journalists who carry arms may remove themselves from the protection afforded to civilians in war by the Geneva Conventions.

Article 79 of the 1977 Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions says: “Journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflicts shall be considered as civilians… They shall be protected as such under the Conventions and this Protocol, provided they take no action adversely affecting their status as civilians…”

INSI and other organisations concerned with the safety of journalists in conflict believe that the bearing of arms would amount to that action.

Journalists and assignment editors considering such a move might wish to address some practical questions and issues:

• Suspicion may fall on all journalists covering a dangerous area if some are armed, perhaps increasing the likelihood of their being targeted. It is similar to the arguments raised over arms in the home – is a burglar going to be deterred or more likely to carry a weapon too? Guns tend to attract guns.

• What if a colleague or, worse, an innocent bystander, perhaps a child, is killed by a journalist?

• What if a journalist panics and opens fire in the midst of an angry mob?

• What is the effect on your legal liability and insurance and the insurance of the company?

• Might a gun in your belt encourage you to go some place it otherwise might have been prudent to avoid?

• If the situation is so dangerous that a weapon is considered vital protection, should you be there at all?

And finally:

• Are you prepared to kill to get your story?