Frequently asked questions: How does international humanitarian law protect journalists?

• Who is considered a journalist under international humanitarian law?

International humanitarian law does not define the term “journalist.” In practice, the term is understood broadly to include a wide range of media professionals engaged in gathering, documenting, preparing or reporting information for the public. This may include correspondents, reporters, photographers, camera operators and technical personnel supporting media work across print, radio, television and digital media. Whether a person is considered a journalist depends on the nature of their activities rather than on formal accreditation or affiliation with a particular media organization.

• What are the main dangers faced by journalists working in armed conflict situations?

Journalists and other media professionals working in armed conflicts face many dangers. Because of the nature of their work, they are often close to hostilities and may be wounded or killed. They may also face violence, threats, detention, kidnapping or other forms of pressure linked to their work. In recent conflicts, journalists and other media professionals have increasingly been affected by direct attacks and other acts of violence prohibited under international humanitarian law.

Journalists also encounter a wide range of obstacles that can prevent them from carrying out their work. These include restrictions on access to conflict-affected areas and information, censorship, harassment, arbitrary detention and attacks. Yet their reporting plays a vital role in informing the public about the realities of armed conflict, including the humanitarian consequences and needs of affected populations. Accurate and independent reporting can also help draw attention to violations of international humanitarian law and the impact of conflict on lives, safety, dignity and basic needs of civilians.

• What protection do media professionals have under international humanitarian law?

International humanitarian law provides strong protection for journalists and other media professionals. While the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols contain only a few specific references to media personnel, such as Article 79 of Additional Protocol I and Article 4A(4) of the Third Geneva Convention, journalists benefit from the full range of rules protecting civilians.

Article 79 of Additional Protocol I confirms that journalists are considered civilians and must be respected and protected as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. This protection also applies in non-international armed conflicts under customary international humanitarian law (Rule 34 of the ICRC's Customary Law Study).

In practice, this means that, as civilians, journalists must be protected against direct attacks and benefit from the general rules governing the conduct of hostilities, as well as safeguards relating to detention and treatment. They lose their protection only if, and for such time as, they directly participate in hostilities.

• Do journalists have special protection under international humanitarian law?

Journalists do not benefit from a special protective status under international humanitarian law comparable to that of medical or humanitarian personnel. However, they are protected as civilians and benefit from the full range of rules protecting civilians in armed conflict. This includes protection against direct attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities, as well as other safeguards relating to the conduct of hostilities and to detention and treatment.

• Are freelance and local journalists protected in the same way as international journalists?

Yes. Under international humanitarian law, protection does not depend on affiliation with a media organization or nationality, but on a person’s status. Freelance, local and international journalists are all considered civilians and are protected in the same way, as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. 

In practice, however, local and freelance journalists may face greater risks. They are often closer to the conflict, may have fewer resources or support, and may be more exposed to pressure from parties to the conflict. Despite these differences, the legal protections afforded to journalists remain the same.

• Do journalists need to be officially accredited to be protected under international humanitarian law?

No. Journalists do not need to be officially accredited in order to be protected under international humanitarian law. Their protection derives from their status as civilians, not from any formal recognition or authorization. This means that all journalists and media professionals are protected as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities, regardless of whether they are accredited, affiliated with a media organization, or working independently.

Accreditation may, in practice, facilitate access to certain areas or provide additional identification, and in some cases it is required to qualify as a war correspondent. However, it is not a condition for protection under international humanitarian law. 

• Does the status of war correspondent confer special protection?

War correspondents are a specific category of journalists recognized under international humanitarian law. They are civilians who are formally authorized to accompany the armed forces, usually through an official accreditation process. Like other journalists, they are protected as civilians as long as they do not take part in hostilities. 

However, if they are captured, they are entitled to prisoner-of-war status under Article 4A(4) of the Third Geneva Convention. This means they benefit from the protections afforded to prisoners of war under the Third Geneva Convention, as supplemented by Additional Protocol I and customary international law.

• What is the difference between war correspondents and "embedded journalists"?

“Embedded journalist” is not a legal term under international humanitarian law and is not formally defined. It is commonly used to describe journalists who report from within or alongside military units. 

Under international humanitarian law, the relevant category is that of “war correspondents”. These are journalists who are formally authorized by the armed forces to accompany them. In practice, some embedded journalists may fall into this category if they have received such authorization. In those cases, if captured, they would be entitled to prisoner-of-war status.

• What about journalists and media professionals who do not qualify as "war correspondents"?

Journalists and other media professionals who are not war correspondents are still protected under international humanitarian law. As civilians, they must be respected and protected as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. If they are detained or otherwise under the authority of a party to the conflict, they are entitled to the protections applicable to civilians. 

All civilians, including a state’s own nationals, are protected by international humanitarian law. In international armed conflicts, civilians who find themselves in the hands of a party to the conflict of which they are not nationals benefit from the protections of the Fourth Geneva Convention. 

In all circumstances, they are entitled to fundamental guarantees, including protection against violence, torture and hostage-taking, as well as fair trial rights. These guarantees are set out in Article 75 of Additional Protocol I and, in non-international armed conflicts, in common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol II, and customary international humanitarian law.

• Are journalists working for the armed forces considered civilians?

Not all persons carrying out media or communication activities in armed conflict are civilians.  Some journalists and media personnel may, in fact, be members of a State's armed forces. In international armed conflicts, they are not considered civilians and may therefore be lawfully targeted, in accordance with the rules of international humanitarian law.

By contrast, civilian journalists, including war correspondents and independent media professionals, remain protected as civilians as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities.

Whether a person is considered a civilian or a member of the armed forces depends on their status and functions, not only on the type of work they perform.

• What does “taking a direct part in hostilities” mean for journalists?

Journalists are protected as civilians under international humanitarian law as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. 

Taking a direct part in hostilities generally refers to acts that are intended to support one party to the conflict in a way that directly causes harm to the opposing side. This may include, for example, gathering or transmitting tactical military information for use in attacks, or otherwise directly assisting military operations. Ordinary journalistic activities, such as reporting on hostilities, taking photographs or filming events, do not constitute taking a direct part in hostilities. 

Whether a person is taking a direct part in hostilities depends on the specific circumstances and the nature of the acts carried out. In any case, the loss of protection is temporary and only applies for the duration of such participation.

• Can journalists be targeted because of what they report?

Journalists are protected as civilians under international humanitarian law. Reporting on a conflict, expressing opinions or sharing information does not make a journalist a lawful target. Journalists may only lose their protection against attack if, and for such time as, they take a direct part in hostilities, as described above. This is a high threshold and depends on the nature of the acts carried out, not on the content of reporting. 

In practice, this means that even critical or unfavorable reporting can never justify attacks against journalists.

• Do attacks against journalists in armed conflict situations amount to war crimes?

Journalists are civilians and are protected under international humanitarian law against direct attacks, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities. Intentionally directing an attack against civilians, including journalists, is prohibited and may amount to a war crime. This is the case in both international and non-international armed conflicts, including under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

• Can media organizations be considered military objectives?

Media organizations, facilities and equipment are generally considered civilian objects, and are protected as such under international humanitarian law. This means they must not be attacked unless they become military objectives. 

A media outlet may only be considered a military objective if by its nature, location, purpose or use it makes an effective contribution to military action and its destruction offers a definite military advantage. This assessment must be made on a case-by-case basis.

In practice, this is a high threshold. The fact that a media organization disseminates information, expresses opinions or reports on the conflict does not in itself make it a military objective. Even when attacking a military objective, parties to the conflict must comply with the rules of proportionality and precautions in attack, including taking feasible precautions to avoid or minimize incidental harm to civilians, including journalists and other media professionals.

• Can journalists carry weapons or use protective equipment such as body armor?

International humanitarian law does not prohibit journalists from using protective equipment such as helmets or body armor. Such equipment does not affect their status as civilians or the protection they are afforded.

By contrast, carrying weapons raises different considerations. Journalists are protected as civilians as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. Carrying or using weapons may affect how they are perceived and can increase the risk of being mistaken for combatants. In certain circumstances, using a weapon could amount to a journalist taking a direct part in hostilities, resulting in a temporary loss of protection against direct attack. 

In a separate vein, wearing clothing similar to military uniforms does not lead journalists to lose their protection against direct attack, but it does make it significantly more difficult for armed forces to distinguish between civilians and combatants. When war correspondents or journalists accompany military units in zones of active combat, especially where they operate in close proximity to armed forces or wear clothing similar to military uniforms, they are at greater risk of being incidentally affected by hostilities. 

In practice, journalists should be aware that, while protective equipment does not affect their legal protection, the presence of weapons or close association with armed actors may expose them to greater risks in the field.

• Does the use of cameras, drones, or other equipment affect journalists' protection?

The use of cameras, drones or other equipment does not in itself affect the protection of journalists under international humanitarian law. Journalists remain civilians and are protected as such, as long as they do not take a direct part in hostilities. 

However, in practice, certain types of equipment may create risks. For example, drones or technical devices may be mistaken for military equipment or interpreted as being used in ways that raise security concerns. This can increase the likelihood of misidentification or suspicion in highly volatile environments. Journalists should therefore be aware that, while their legal protection remains unchanged, the use of certain equipment may affect how they are perceived in the field.

• Do journalists have to display “press” markings to be protected?

Journalists are protected under international humanitarian law as civilians, whether or not they display “press” markings. There is no requirement for journalists to wear such markings in order to benefit from protection. 

In practice, displaying “press” markings or carrying press identification may help to identify journalists and reduce the risk of being mistaken for members of the armed forces or fighters. However, in some situations, it may also increase their visibility and expose them to additional risks. The decision to use such markings is therefore often context-dependent and ultimately rests with the journalists and their organizations.

• What happens if a journalist is accused of espionage?

Journalism should not be confused with espionage. Reporting on a conflict, gathering information and sharing it with the public are normal journalistic activities and do not, as such, amount to espionage. However, in situations of armed conflict, journalists may be accused of espionage, particularly if they are perceived as gathering information of military value. The consequences of such accusations can be serious, including detention and prosecution.

International humanitarian law provides important safeguards in such situations. Journalists, as civilians, are entitled to humane treatment and fundamental guarantees, including protection against violence and the right to a fair trial. At the same time, journalists should avoid activities that could amount to direct participation in hostilities, thereby blurring the distinction between their professional role and that of parties to the conflict, such as directly assisting military operations by transmitting information to a party to the conflict for operational purposes.

• Can journalists incur criminal responsibility for their activities during armed conflict?

Journalists, like all persons, may incur criminal responsibility under national or international law for certain acts committed during armed conflict. In certain circumstances, media activities may give rise to criminal responsibility, including where a person directly incites the commission of war crimes, genocide or other serious international crimes.

At the same time, reporting on armed conflict, expressing opinions, or criticizing parties to a conflict do not, in themselves, amount to criminal conduct or remove the protection afforded to journalists under international humanitarian law.

• Does international humanitarian law guarantee journalists access to conflict areas or freedom of reporting?

International humanitarian law protects journalists as civilians in armed conflict, but it does not regulate all aspects of journalistic activity.

In particular, international humanitarian law does not grant journalists an unrestricted right to enter territory or access areas controlled by a party to the conflict. Access may be subject to security, military or other restrictions imposed in accordance with applicable international and domestic law.

Questions relating to freedom of expression and freedom of the press are primarily governed by international human rights law and domestic law. Nevertheless, journalists' work remains essential for informing the public about armed conflicts and their humanitarian consequences.

• What happens if a journalist is injured, killed, or goes missing during an armed conflict?

International humanitarian law requires that all persons who are wounded or sick, including journalists, be respected, protected and cared for without adverse distinction. Parties to the conflict must take all possible measures to search for and collect the wounded. If a journalist is killed, their body must be treated with dignity and respect. The dead must be collected, properly managed and, where possible, identified. Their remains should, where possible, be returned to their families.

When journalists go missing, parties to the conflict must take steps to account for them and provide information to their families.

These obligations reflect a broader humanitarian principle: families have the right to know the fate of their relatives, and efforts must be made to prevent people from going missing and to clarify their fate when they do.

• What role do states and armed groups have in protecting journalists and other media professionals? States and parties to armed conflicts, including non-State armed groups, have a key responsibility to protect journalists and other media professionals. Un

States and parties to armed conflicts, including non-State armed groups, have a key responsibility to protect journalists and other media professionals. Under international humanitarian law, all parties to a conflict are bound by the obligation to respect and protect civilians, including journalists, and to ensure that members of armed forces are aware of and comply with these rules. 

This includes giving clear instructions, providing training and taking practical measures to reduce the risks faced by journalists during military operations. Parties to the conflict must also take steps to prevent violations and ensure that allegations of attacks against journalists are properly investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted. Strengthening respect for these obligations is essential to improving the safety of journalists and other media professionals in armed conflict.

• Do existing laws provide journalists with enough protection? Is there anything that should be done to enhance their protection?

International humanitarian law provides a strong framework for the protection of journalists and other media professionals in armed conflict. The main challenge is not the absence of rules but ensuring that they are respected in practice. In particular, continued efforts are needed to prevent violations, ensure that they are properly investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted.

The ICRC works to promote respect for these rules, including through training and support for those responsible for applying them. Strengthening accountability and ensuring compliance remain essential to improving the protection of journalists.

• What activities is the ICRC carrying out to achieve this aim?

The ICRC works to promote respect for the rules that protect journalists and civilians more broadly. This includes providing training and guidance on international humanitarian law to armed forces, journalists, and other relevant actors. 

The ICRC also engages in dialogue with parties to armed conflicts to encourage compliance with these rules in practice. In addition, it participates in expert discussions and cooperates with other organizations working to protect journalists, with a view to strengthening awareness and respect for the law.

• What needs to be done to ensure better protection for media personnel working in armed conflict situations?

Efforts are underway at the national and international levels to improve the protection of journalists and other media professionals in armed conflict. However, serious challenges remain, and more needs to be done to ensure that existing rules are respected in practice. Strengthening protection requires continued efforts to raise awareness of international humanitarian law, improve training for those involved in military operations and ensure accountability for violations. It also depends on cooperation between states, armed forces, media organizations and other relevant actors. 

The ICRC continues to support these efforts by promoting respect for the law and encouraging practical measures to enhance the safety of journalists.