This page sets out how international humanitarian law, the body of law that applies in armed conflict, treats journalists. It follows the explanation published by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the text of UN Security Council resolution 1738 (2006) as published by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, and UN and UNESCO material on the safety of journalists. It is general information about the law, not legal advice, and it does not assess any particular conflict or incident.
The rules at a glance
| Rule | What it says, as the ICRC explains it | Type of rule |
|---|---|---|
| Additional Protocol I, Article 79 | Journalists are civilians and must be respected and protected as long as they take no direct part in hostilities. | Treaty (1977) |
| Third Geneva Convention, Article 4A(4) | War correspondents formally authorised to accompany the armed forces are entitled to prisoner-of-war status if captured. | Treaty (1949) |
| Customary law, Rule 34 of the ICRC study | The civilian protection of journalists also applies in non-international armed conflicts. | Customary law |
The ICRC's summary is that the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols contain only a few specific references to media personnel, but that journalists benefit from the full range of rules that protect civilians.
Who counts as a journalist
International humanitarian law does not define the word "journalist". The ICRC explains that in practice the term is understood broadly, to include media professionals who gather, document, prepare or report information for the public: correspondents, reporters, photographers, camera operators and technical staff, in print, radio, television and digital media.
What counts is the nature of the work, not formal accreditation or employment by a particular organisation. The ICRC states that freelance, local and international journalists are protected in the same way, because protection depends on a person's status rather than on nationality or affiliation. It adds that, in practice, local and freelance journalists may face greater risks: they are often closer to the conflict, may have fewer resources, and may be more exposed to pressure from the parties.
Additional Protocol I, Article 79
Additional Protocol I is one of the two Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. Its Article 79 concerns, in the words the Security Council used when it recalled the article in resolution 1738, the protection of journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflict.
The ICRC describes what Article 79 does: it confirms that journalists are considered civilians, and that they must be respected and protected as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. In practice, the ICRC explains, this means journalists are protected against direct attack, benefit from the general rules on the conduct of hostilities, and are covered by the safeguards on detention and treatment that apply to civilians.
No special status
The ICRC notes that journalists do not have a special protective status comparable to that of medical or humanitarian personnel. Their protection is the protection of civilians, which is extensive in its own right.
War correspondents
War correspondents are a specific category. The ICRC describes them as civilians formally authorised to accompany the armed forces, usually through an official accreditation process. Like other journalists they are protected as civilians while they take no part in hostilities. The difference is what happens on capture: under Article 4A(4) of the Third Geneva Convention, they are entitled to prisoner-of-war status, with the protections of that Convention as supplemented by Additional Protocol I and customary law.
The Security Council made the same distinction in resolution 1738, recalling that journalists on dangerous missions are to be considered civilians, without prejudice to the right of war correspondents accredited to the armed forces to prisoner-of-war status under Article 4.A.4 of the Third Geneva Convention.
"Embedded journalist" is not a legal term. The ICRC explains that it describes journalists who report from within or alongside military units; some of them may be war correspondents in the legal sense if they have been formally authorised, and would then be entitled to prisoner-of-war status if captured. Journalists who are not war correspondents remain protected as civilians, and if they come under the authority of a party to the conflict they are entitled to the protections that apply to civilians, including the fundamental guarantees against violence, torture and hostage-taking and the right to a fair trial.
Non-international armed conflicts
For non-international armed conflicts, the ICRC states that the protection of journalists as civilians also applies, under customary international humanitarian law, as set out in Rule 34 of the ICRC's study of customary law. The protection therefore does not depend on whether a conflict is fought between states or within one.
The ICRC also notes that intentionally directing an attack against civilians, including journalists, is prohibited and may amount to a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts, including under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
When protection is lost
A journalist loses protection against attack only if, and for such time as, they take a direct part in hostilities. The ICRC explains that this generally means acts intended to support one party in a way that directly harms the other, such as gathering or transmitting tactical military information for use in attacks, or otherwise directly assisting military operations. The loss is temporary and lasts only while the participation continues.
The ICRC is clear about what does not count. Ordinary journalistic activity, including reporting on hostilities, taking photographs and filming, is not direct participation. Reporting on a conflict, expressing opinions or sharing information does not make a journalist a lawful target, and even critical or unfavourable reporting can never justify an attack. Journalism is also not espionage, although the ICRC notes that journalists are sometimes accused of it when they are seen as gathering information of military value.
Media organisations, buildings and equipment are generally civilian objects. In the ICRC's explanation, a media outlet becomes a military objective only if, by its nature, location, purpose or use, it makes an effective contribution to military action and its destruction offers a definite military advantage, a high threshold assessed case by case. Disseminating information or opinions does not in itself meet it. Resolution 1738 likewise recalls that media equipment and installations are civilian objects and are not to be attacked unless they are military objectives.
Equipment, markings and detention
- Protective equipment. Helmets and body armour do not affect a journalist's civilian status.
- Weapons. Carrying weapons raises different considerations. It can increase the risk of being mistaken for a combatant, and in some circumstances using a weapon could amount to direct participation in hostilities.
- Clothing. Clothing similar to a military uniform does not remove protection, but it makes it much harder for armed forces to distinguish civilians from combatants.
- "Press" markings. They are not required for protection. The ICRC notes that they can help identification but can also increase visibility and risk, so their use depends on the context and is for journalists and their organisations to decide.
- Wounded, dead and missing. The wounded must be cared for without adverse distinction, the dead treated with dignity and, where possible, identified and returned to their families, and parties must take steps to account for the missing.
These points summarise the ICRC's explanation, which sets out each of them in more detail.
The United Nations
Security Council resolution 1738 (2006). Adopted unanimously at the Council's 5613th meeting, the resolution condemns intentional attacks against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel in armed conflict and calls on all parties to end them. It recalls that such personnel on dangerous professional missions are civilians to be respected and protected, provided they take no action adversely affecting that status; emphasises the responsibility of states to end impunity and to prosecute those responsible for serious violations; urges all parties to respect the professional independence and rights of journalists as civilians; and asks the Secretary-General to include the safety of journalists in his reports on the protection of civilians.
The UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity. UN News reported in November 2012 that the plan resulted from a process begun in 2010 at the request of the Intergovernmental Council of UNESCO's International Programme for the Development of Communication, and was endorsed by the UN Chief Executives Board in April 2012. Planned activities included helping governments develop laws to safeguard journalists, training journalists in physical and online safety, establishing emergency response mechanisms and strengthening safety in conflict zones, as well as better protection for women journalists.
UNESCO. UNESCO describes promoting the safety of journalists and combating impunity as central to its work for press freedom. It leads the Plan of Action, monitors killings of journalists through its Observatory of Killed Journalists, periodically asks member states for information on the status of judicial inquiries, and leads the commemoration of World Press Freedom Day and the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists.
What the law does not do
The ICRC points out that international humanitarian law protects journalists as civilians but does not regulate every aspect of their work. In particular, it does not give journalists an unrestricted right to enter territory or reach areas controlled by a party to the conflict; access can be restricted for security, military or other reasons in line with international and domestic law. Questions of freedom of expression and press freedom are governed mainly by international human rights law and domestic law.
Nor does the law, on its own, keep anyone safe. The ICRC's view is that the main challenge is not an absence of rules but making sure they are respected: preventing violations, and investigating and, where appropriate, prosecuting them when they occur. On its current page the ICRC also states that it does not operate a dedicated hotline or referral mechanism providing protection or security assistance to journalists at risk.
Back to all guides