Abstract
The UN has a plan to protect the lives of journalists in troubled countries. But is anyone telling the journalists themselves?
It is well understood among journalists, think tanks, NGOs and communication scholars that the high levels of impunity in cases of killings of journalists need to be urgently addressed. Nine out of 10 perpetrators who thought that it would be a good idea to silence a journalist by having them killed – probably because they got too close to the truth or their reporting was simply troublesome or inconvenient – get away with it unpunished. Shockingly, this 90 per cent impunity rate doesn't even begin to cover the range of attacks against journalists across the world that might not end in death but in injuries, intimidation and fear.
What does that mean? Well, it means that journalists are not safe, that they are not sufficiently protected. It means that journalism can be a dangerous profession. It means that the ultimate threat to independent and investigative journalism is already with us: self-censorship caused by fear.
The issue of impunity is complex, as impunity is a symptom as well as a cause. It is often a symptom of corrupt politicians, of a compromised legal system, of a political system undermined by organised crime, by law enforcement endorsing lawlessness. This is all well understood luckily. The issue of impunity has also raised the attention of and action by international NGOs such as the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Reporters Without Borders, as well as the UN. All these have been actively involved in combating impunity and seeking to provide journalists with protection and ultimately and ideally (utopian maybe) to try to facilitate “safe and enabling” environments in which journalists can carry out their investigative journalistic duty, where they are able to work on behalf of civil society, and where they are allowed to scrutinise political institutions and the like.
In 2012 the UN launched its inter-agency Action Plan on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity to work “toward the creation of a free and safe environment for journalists and media workers in both conflict and non-conflict situations, with a view to strengthening peace, democracy and development worldwide”. In cooperation with UN agencies and UN member states it promotes the development of legislation and mechanisms to “implement existing international rules and principles” concerning journalism safety. It also encourages the development of practical measures such as “accessible, real-time emergency response mechanisms for groups and media organizations”. The UN is also aware that for the fight against impunity to stand any chance of success it is necessary to combine actions from a number of stakeholders from within the UN system, other intergovernmental organisations, governments, professional associations, media houses, academics and NGOs. The first implementation period has focused on initiatives in Iraq, Nepal, Pakistan and South Sudan, as well as a number of Latin American countries, but it targets any country in which journalists suffer from low levels of media freedom and operate in a climate of impunity, and where the government is willing to cooperate.
As the UN is also aware, such initiatives can only work if they are well communicated and if those concerned know of their existence. A research project funded by the International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC), the Centre for Freedom of the Media (CFOM) at the University of Sheffield undertook 40 interviews with editors and senior journalists at national and regional levels in five countries: Mexico, India, Pakistan, Turkey and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). What CFOM was trying to find out was whether journalists in these countries that were ranked low down on press freedom indexes were aware of the UN Action Plan and if so, how they assessed its feasibility based on their experience of working as a journalist in a context where being a journalist was dangerous and where impunity was the “song of all times”, as one of our interviewees put it.
Mexico
In 2016 Mexico was ranked 107th on the fragile states index (indicating that the state is being pushed towards the brink of failure), eighth on the impunity index and 149th in the press freedom index, with 12 journalists killed that year. Reporters Without Borders summarised the situation in Mexico as a “land of the drug cartels [and as] the western hemisphere's deadliest country for the media. Murders of journalists are typically carried out in cold blood, like executions, and almost always go unpunished.” In short: “Mexico is the deadliest country in Latin America for journalists.”
Only one of the interviewees had heard about the UN Action Plan and stated that Mexico had adapted several elements of it but mainly at state level without involving the media. “Mexican institutions are built to pretend.” While the Mexican government could say, “Yes we have these institutions, we have undertaken legal reform etc”, it meant nothing when the “heartfelt investment”, as the journalist called it, was missing. The greatest worry with regard to implementation was that the UN was too general in its approach and would focus on cities instead of the regions where such actions would be needed the most. Some also feared that Mexico was in too much of a “messy situation” to receive effective support. One journalist noted that “some people from the UN came and met with journalists and [said] that they heard about the difficulties journalists face”, but the interviewee concluded: “We never heard of them again.”
India
In 2016 India was ranked 133rd in the press freedom index. Reporters Without Borders explained the ranking by referring to the government's indifference to threats against journalists as well as its “desire to increase control of media coverage”. In fact, the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, “envisages opening a journalism university run by former propaganda ministry officials”. India also figures on CPJ's impunity index: it was ranked 14th in 2016 with Uttar Pradesh becoming one of its most dangerous regions.
So what about Indian journalists? Just as in the DRC, below, awareness of the UN Action Plan was low; only two of the interviewees had heard of it. And just as in the DRC, the opinions on the necessity and the feasibility of the initiative were divided. Some journalists denied that India faced any issues that would justify the attentions of the UN initiative and that other countries, such as Pakistan, were seen to be more in need of international help than India. Other journalists claimed that the Indian government was in fact “a good supporter of the welfare of journalists – freedom of expression is strong and the government believes in it”, while at the same time admitting that the government was occasionally involved in the blackmailing of news organisations to receive favourable coverage. Whereas some welcomed the UN Action Plan, one journalist expressed doubts about the UN, saying that it lacked competencies or authority to successfully implement such a plan. Another journalist welcomed the UN's effort but was critical about it not being able to help individual, local journalists under threat: “A journalist from a rural background is busy making ends meet. He is not an educated highflying journalist from the capital who can afford to fight for powers mentioned in the UN Action Plan or even understand the basics of the plan.” His main concern was “not getting killed by local goons or the police. No UN AP can save him if he is in trouble.”
Pakistan
Pakistan is ranked 147th on the 2016 press freedom index, a low ranking that the Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA) explains as follows: “Despite the commitments of the Pakistan government to protect journalists, media freedoms remain endangered in the country. Pakistani journalists continue to struggle with the threats posed by violent extremists who consider media to be a legitimate target.” Additionally, Pakistan ranks ninth on the 2016 impunity index, indicating that attacks, violence against and attempted murders of journalists remain frequent. It is also worth remembering that the implementation strategy of the UN Action Plan started in Pakistan in 2013, and since then there have been various capacity-building initiatives such as the establishment of a Press Clubs Safety Hub project (which is funded by the Pakistan Journalists Safety Fund) and the Pakistan Coalition on Media Safety (PCOM). According to the NGO International Media Support, “the lives of more than 40 journalists have been saved through crucial support provided through the safety fund”.
Six out of eight interviewees had heard about the UN Action Plan. However, opinions about concrete action taken by the UN were divided. Whereas one journalist was well informed and could name the different implementation programmes, most of the interviewees commented on the problem of awareness and the need for international organisations to know more about the grassroots in order to have impact. In other words, journalists claimed that the public as well as journalists themselves were largely unaware of the UN Action Plan and inquired what the UN was doing in terms of publicity. For them, any success of the initiative necessitated mass awareness and ultimately, so they believed, it was necessary to consult media owners and senior editors for advice, engage with journalism associations and press clubs as well as the press information department at federal and at regional levels if the UN wanted the plan to have genuine impact.
Turkey
Turkey ranks 151st on the press freedom index and given the recent developments after the attempted coup in July 2016, the situation is getting worse. Our data was gathered at the beginning of 2016, before the imposition of emergency laws permitting the government to rule by decree. Journalists and research assistants have since asked for anonymity.
None of the interviewees had heard about the UN Action Plan. Journalists voiced concerns about such initiatives lacking legitimacy as they came from outside the country. Much therefore depended on how the UN conducted itself – how aggressive it was and how skilfully it would use its soft power – when carrying out the plan. The engagement with grassroots' journalists and journalism associations was seen to be vital. The west was perceived by some journalists as hypocritical because while it was defending western liberal values it was also seen to be supporting “dangerous groups”, thereby undermining the stability of the country and in some ways the success of international initiatives. Concomitantly, Turkish journalists perceived impunity, as noted in the beginning, as a symptom of “an entire system” being badly mismanaged.
Democratic Republic of Congo
The DRC is ranked 152nd on the Reporters Without Borders' 2016 press freedom index because of journalists being “exposed to threats, physical violence, arrest, prolonged detention and even murder” and because the “main perpetrators – the army, police and security services – enjoy complete impunity”.
Five out of the eight journalists Sheffield's CFOM interviewed hadn't heard about the UN Action Plan. The opinions about the feasibility of the plan and its chances for success were divided. Whereas some believed it to be a good idea and that it would be a big step forward if there could be a single piece of legislation on journalism safety, others criticised the fact that communication on this initiative had been insufficient and that a lot of journalists (and the public) were unaware of its existence. Journalists also recognised, just as the UN does itself, that the UN can't be successful on its own but needs the support of journalists, the cooperation of member states and to be “pushy”. Even then, though, the journalists interviewed doubted that there was sufficient political will to carry the initiative through.
When looking at the answers given by our interviewees in these five countries it becomes clear that there is a low level of awareness of the UN Action Plan, some doubts about its relevance and potential for success as well as a call for the involvement of grassroots journalists and awareness raising among the public.
What does that mean – that the UN isn't successful and that the Action Plan should be abandoned? Clearly not. Rather, the responses and reactions of our interviewees can be taken as a form of advice and as a reminder. The advice is that the UN initiative should intensify its efforts regarding awareness raising and engaging with individual journalists (especially those in the regions) and that it needs to identify channels of communication that enable it to reach a wide range of individual journalists more effectively. These responses remind us that tackling the issue of impunity is a complex issue that does require, as the UN consistently points out, a multi-stakeholder approach in which each party – including journalists – takes responsibility and contributes to the implementation in areas where it is desperately needed.
