Global Journalist Security https://www.journalistsecurity.net A Different Approach to Journalist & Others' Safety Thu, 24 Mar 2016 23:25:42 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.2 Statement by Frank Smyth to the United Nations Human Rights Council, 26th session, Geneva, June 11, 2014 https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2014/11/03/4210/ Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:48:11 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=4210 Statement by Frank Smyth Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists to the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner at the 26th session of the Human Rights Council Panel Discussion on the safety of journalists Geneva, Switzerland, June 11, 2014 Full text of statement posted here: http://cpj.org/blog/FrankSmythStatementHRC26.pdf Transcript of session including statements by panelists at the link below and pasted beneath Frank's written Statement. http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14680&LangID=E UN Web TV video of sessions here: http://webtv.un.org/watch/panel-discussion-on-the-safety-of-journalists-4th-meeting-26th-regular-session-of-human-rights-council/3617261879001/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Statement by Frank Smyth Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists to the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner at the 26th session of the Human Rights Council Panel Discussion on the safety of journalists Geneva, Switzerland, June 11, 2014 Good morning. I am honored to be a part of this esteemed panel including figures and friends whose work I have long admired, and to be addressing this all-important international body for the defense of human rights. My name is Frank Smyth and I am the Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, the independent, international press freedom watchdog. I am also the Founder and Executive Director of Global Journalist Security, a firm dedicated to providing integrated physical, digital and emotional self-care safety training to journalists and human rights defenders worldwide. Please know, too, that while I advise the nonprofit Committee to Protect Journalists or CPJ, I am speaking here this morning for myself. And, to save time, please allow me to tell you from the start my main point. The United Nations and its various bodies deserve great credit for having brought direly needed attention to the cause of journalists at risk worldwide. But we still need to take two more important steps. First, we in the press freedom and freedom of expression community must be precise and clear in our language, and focus on what has long been and remains the greatest threat to both press freedom and freedom of expression and at-risk journalists worldwide: The disturbingly consistent and alarmingly high rate of impunity for murdering journalists literally around the globe. We need to say that clearly and unequivocally for everyone including every Member State to hear. Second, individual Member States, especially those where unsolved journalist murders are common, need to start taking concrete steps toward finally bringing the murderers of journalists to justice. Unfortunately, in nearly nine out of ten journalist murder cases worldwide, no one is ever prosecuted at all. What is the leading cause of journalists’ deaths? In a word, murder: Most of the 1055 journalists killed since 1992 did not step on a landmine, or get killed in an airstrike, or in a car bomb, or get shot in crossfire, or die in any kind of terrorist attack or engagement between armed forces. No, more than two-thirds, or 67 percent of all journalists killed worldwide –-at least 703 since 1992-- have been murdered outright in direct reprisal for their reporting. Slain by assassins like two men, one with a gun on the back of a motorcycle, or a lone gunmen waiting in a journalist’s apartment building, or unknown assailants who later dump a journalist’s remains, perhaps bearing signs of torture, by the side of a road How often are journalists murdered? Since 1992, a journalist has been murdered at least once every two weeks, or every 13 days. The murdered journalists are almost invariably local reporters like Gregorio Jiménez de la Cruz whose remains were found earlier this year in Veracruz, Mexico, or Vyacheslav Veremiy who was beaten and shot by a mob a week later in Kiev, Ukraine, or Shan Dahar who was shot in the back weeks before while filming outside a pharmacy in Larkana, Pakistan. What could be worse than that? --Worse than murdering journalists? Only one thing: Murdering journalists with impunity. Because if the killers, including both the triggermen and the people behind them, get away with it, the impact of killing one journalist is to effectively silence countless more. If we have learned one thing in recent decades, it is that violence against the press sharply reduces the possibilities of holding wrongdoers accountable, and the chances of criminal and corrupt activity being brought to light. How often do the murderers get away with assassinating journalists? They get away with it almost all the time, or in 88 percent of all journalist murders since 1992. For us here today the issue of murdering journalists with impunity --should be, must be-- the priority of any viable international effort to defend press freedom and freedom of expression. The real issue facing journalists today is not one of “safety,” and, I say that as someone who has a direct interest in helping to train journalists and others help navigate dangers in hostile environments around the world. The real issue, instead, is one of impunity, or how to bring the murderers of journalists to justice. On this score, last year’s U.N. report on the safety of journalists seems, well, timid. The report raised the notion of "Impunity for attacks against journalists.” But without being more specific, even while adding that it “is a serious and pervasive problem.” The report goes on to note that "there is near total impunity in cases of violations of the right to life of journalists,” using legal language instead of a clearer term like murder. Only later does the report raise for the first time the issue of "the murder" of journalists where no on has “been held accountable.” Yet the report still fails to juxtapose the two terms to simply say: impunity for murder. If we were in a newsroom, I’d say we buried the lead. In fact, it seems like the lead has been intentionally stuck in the mud. There are no doubt reasons –-rarely spoken out loud-- why a U.N. body might prefer to be indirect. So as not to offend Member States. But those same reasons now point us squarely to a conundrum that both […]

The post Statement by Frank Smyth to the United Nations Human Rights Council, 26th session, Geneva, June 11, 2014 appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> Statement by Frank Smyth

Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists

to the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner

at the 26th session of the Human Rights Council

Panel Discussion on the safety of journalists

Geneva, Switzerland, June 11, 2014

Full text of statement posted here: http://cpj.org/blog/FrankSmythStatementHRC26.pdf

Transcript of session including statements by panelists at the link below and pasted beneath Frank's written Statement.

http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14680&LangID=E

UN Web TV video of sessions here: http://webtv.un.org/watch/panel-discussion-on-the-safety-of-journalists-4th-meeting-26th-regular-session-of-human-rights-council/3617261879001/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statement by Frank Smyth

Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists

to the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner

at the 26th session of the Human Rights Council

Panel Discussion on the safety of journalists

Geneva, Switzerland, June 11, 2014

Good morning. I am honored to be a part of this esteemed panel including figures and friends whose work I have long admired, and to be addressing this all-important international body for the defense of human rights.

My name is Frank Smyth and I am the Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, the independent, international press freedom watchdog. I am also the Founder and Executive Director of Global Journalist Security, a firm dedicated to providing integrated physical, digital and emotional self-care safety training to journalists and human rights defenders worldwide.

Please know, too, that while I advise the nonprofit Committee to Protect Journalists or CPJ, I am speaking here this morning for myself. And, to save time, please allow me to tell you from the start my main point.

The United Nations and its various bodies deserve great credit for having brought direly needed attention to the cause of journalists at risk worldwide. But we still need to take two more important steps.

First, we in the press freedom and freedom of expression community must be precise and clear in our language, and focus on what has long been and remains the greatest threat to both press freedom and freedom of expression and at-risk journalists worldwide: The disturbingly consistent and alarmingly high rate of impunity for murdering journalists literally around the globe. We need to say that clearly and unequivocally for everyone including every Member State to hear.

Second, individual Member States, especially those where unsolved journalist murders are common, need to start taking concrete steps toward finally bringing the murderers of journalists to justice. Unfortunately, in nearly nine out of ten journalist murder cases worldwide, no one is ever prosecuted at all.

What is the leading cause of journalists’ deaths?

In a word, murder: Most of the 1055 journalists killed since 1992 did not step on a landmine, or get killed in an airstrike, or in a car bomb, or get shot in crossfire, or die in any kind of terrorist attack or engagement between armed forces. No, more than two-thirds, or 67 percent of all journalists killed worldwide –-at least 703 since 1992-- have been murdered outright in direct reprisal for their reporting. Slain by assassins like two men, one with a gun on the back of a motorcycle, or a lone gunmen waiting in a journalist’s apartment building, or unknown assailants who later dump a journalist’s remains, perhaps bearing signs of torture, by the side of a road

How often are journalists murdered?

Since 1992, a journalist has been murdered at least once every two weeks, or every 13 days. The murdered journalists are almost invariably local reporters like Gregorio Jiménez de la Cruz whose remains were found earlier this year in Veracruz, Mexico, or Vyacheslav Veremiy who was beaten and shot by a mob a week later in Kiev, Ukraine, or Shan Dahar who was shot in the back weeks before while filming outside a pharmacy in Larkana, Pakistan.

What could be worse than that?

--Worse than murdering journalists? Only one thing: Murdering journalists with impunity. Because if the killers, including both the triggermen and the people behind them, get away with it, the impact of killing one journalist is to effectively silence countless more. If we have learned one thing in recent decades, it is that violence against the press sharply reduces the possibilities of holding wrongdoers accountable, and the chances of criminal and corrupt activity being brought to light.

How often do the murderers get away with assassinating journalists?

They get away with it almost all the time, or in 88 percent of all journalist murders since 1992.

For us here today the issue of murdering journalists with impunity --should be, must be-- the priority of any viable international effort to defend press freedom and freedom of expression. The real issue facing journalists today is not one of “safety,” and, I say that as someone who has a direct interest in helping to train journalists and others help navigate dangers in hostile environments around the world. The real issue, instead, is one of impunity, or how to bring the murderers of journalists to justice.

On this score, last year’s U.N. report on the safety of journalists seems, well, timid. The report raised the notion of "Impunity for attacks against journalists.” But without being more specific, even while adding that it “is a serious and pervasive problem.” The report goes on to note that "there is near total impunity in cases of violations of the right to life of journalists,” using legal language instead of a clearer term like murder.

Only later does the report raise for the first time the issue of "the murder" of journalists where no on has “been held accountable.” Yet the report still fails to juxtapose the two terms to simply say: impunity for murder.

If we were in a newsroom, I’d say we buried the lead. In fact, it seems like the lead has been intentionally stuck in the mud.

There are no doubt reasons –-rarely spoken out loud-- why a U.N. body might prefer to be indirect. So as not to offend Member States. But those same reasons now point us squarely to a conundrum that both the U.N. action plan and we, as advocates, must confront. On the one hand, we need a consensus among Member States for any plan to go forward. No doubt about that. But if we were to go forward, we must do so in a way that makes the plan we choose worth continuing. Because anything else would, at the end of the day, not help.

The Committee to Protect Journalists’ Courtney Radsch noted last month in a letter to the Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner: “Despite increased attention by the international community and Member States” to journalist killings since the adoption of the U.N. Plan of Action for the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, “there has been very little progress made in both limiting the number of journalists imprisoned or killed and in bringing those killers to justice.”

One reason that little progress has been made may be the lack of cooperation from Member States.

We all know that there is a difference between jail and murder. When states or, for that matter, insurgent, terrorist, criminal or other irregular armed groups jail or kidnap journalists they bring scrutiny upon themselves for denying journalists their voice. But when a journalist is murdered, or silenced forever, the perpetrators all too often enjoy the benefits of plausible deniability.

Another uncomfortable fact may help explain why U.N. bodies have been reluctant to directly address the issue, as this fact concerns the role of various authorities in many Member States. Insurgents, terrorists, criminals and others all murder journalists. But, according to CPJ research, when it comes to journalist murders since 1992, government authorities are suspected of being responsible for more than one-fourth, or no less than 28 percent of all journalists’ murders worldwide.

This fact may help explain why nearly half of the Member States failed to respond to requests by the UNESCO Director-General for voluntary information on the status of judicial inquiries as of mid-2013, according to the UNESCO World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development report earlier this year.

It seems that the U.N. action plan has come to a crossroads. We have successfully brought more attention to the issue of journalists being imprisoned, attacked and killed. That is a very big and important step, and it is a credit to the work of many working both within and outside of U.N. bodies.

To go forward from here, however, we need the cooperation of Member States. We need you to provide data on the status of judicial progress in journalist murders, whether or not much, or even any progress has been made. But let’s at least start taking note of the issue to begin a real discussion.

And we need you, the individual Member States, to each commit to taking concrete measures to finally start bringing the murderers of journalists to justice. No one suggests that would be easy. But nothing would do more to advance the goals we have agreed to here.

Thank you.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Human Rights Council holds panel discussion on the safety of journalists

MORNING

11 June 2014

The Human Rights Council this morning held a panel discussion on the safety of journalists to identify challenges and good practices to ensure the safety of journalists and to promote a better understanding of relevant international human rights norms and standards.

Navi Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in her opening remarks said that sound, bold and independent journalism was vital in any democratic society. The safety of journalists was simply essential to the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of all, as well as the right to development. However, more than 1,000 journalists had been killed since 1992 as a direct result of their profession. Among the deadliest years were 2012 and 2013, and at least 15 had been killed since the start of this year. In many States, the perpetrators could virtually count on impunity. The international legal framework for the protection of journalists was in place. States were urged to approach the issue under discussion from this human rights perspective, and to protect journalists and other media workers in the broadest sense.

Ghida Fakhry, journalist and panel moderator, said that journalism was a pillar of a modern society, and also a human rights pillar. It sometimes came with a very high price tag and was a risky business in many parts of the world, as highlighted by the High Commissioner for Human Rights in her opening remarks. The purpose of the panel today was to identify best practices to ensure the safety of journalists and to discuss their implementation: what States, international organizations and the Human Rights Council could do, but also what journalists themselves could do to mitigate the risks. Another key question for debate was who a journalist was today.

Frank Smyth, Journalist and Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, said that more needed to be done to protect journalists. The greatest threat to the safety of journalists was unsolved murders: two out of three of all journalists killed were murdered and no one was prosecuted at all. This was the issue that needed to be addressed and impunity for murders of journalists and safety of journalists must be connected. Concrete steps must be taken to address murders, and to do so, more transparency was needed as was an adequate and due judicial process.

Getachew Engida, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said UNESCO had developed a plan for the safety of journalists, but this plan was unfortunately still on paper while impunity remained the name of the game. In order to implement the plan, real political commitment from leaders as well as adjustments in the legal system were needed. Concerning the need for transparency and accountability, Mr. Engida said that UNESCO actively sought information from its Member States, and stressed the limitations of a United Nations organization which did not have law enforcement capacities.

Dunja Mijatovic, Representative of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on Freedom of the Media, said that it was necessary to find ways of engaging more and to open the doors where the doors were closed when it came to impunity. The safety of journalists was extremely important. There was a need for a stronger voice when it came to condemning those countries that were not doing what they should be doing.

Abeer Saasy, Journalist and Vice-President of the Syndicate of Journalists of Egypt, stressed the difficulties in defining ‘journalists’, while noting that the idea of the profession was informing. The issue was not whether to put the badge of being a journalist or not, as this could lead to targeting. In the Middle East, 90 per cent of murdered journalists had been shot in the head or tortured before death. Addressing the situation of local journalists and not only international journalists was also important, as they lived in those difficult areas and needed protection.

Frank La Rue, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said that while it was true that all individuals around the world had the same rights and deserved the same protection, some individuals faced special danger and risk and deserved special protection. The same way the United Nations had a Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, the moment was right for a United Nations declaration on journalists. Every single State should have an emergency mechanism in place for human rights defenders and journalists.

During the discussion, speakers stressed the value of the contribution of the media and journalists to democracy. Participants called on States to ensure accountability by investigating attacks and crimes against journalists and bringing perpetrators to justice. Some delegations reaffirmed the need to ensure the legal and physical safety of journalists from attacks by security forces and non-State actors and inquired about good practices in this regard. While the digital age had brought unlimited opportunities for dissemination of information, it had also opened up the media to new forms of vulnerability and interference and this required new ways of thinking to keep journalists safe. Speakers also underlined the need for political will, as well as a conducive legislative framework for the protection of journalists. Delegations shared information about different measures undertaken in their countries, ranging from legislative measures, to public information and awareness, and emergency protection mechanisms.

Speaking in the discussion were the European Union, Egypt (on behalf of the Arab Group), Russia (on behalf of the Collective Security Treaty Organization), Russia, Austria, Morocco, Brazil, Estonia, Tunisia, Montenegro, Ecuador, Colombia, Algeria, Slovenia, Mexico, Lithuania, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Organisation international de la Francophonie, United States, Poland, France, Greece, India, China, Czech Republic, Ireland, Portugal, Italy, and Pakistan.

The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Article XIX, International Federation of Journalists, Press Emblem Campaign, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, Eastern Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project, and International Humanist and Ethical Union.

The Council is holding a full day of meetings today. At 12.30 p.m., the Council will resume its clustered interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteurs on the right to freedom of opinion and expression and on freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, to be followed by a clustered interactive dialogue with the mandate holders on violence against women, its causes and consequences and on extreme poverty and human rights.

Opening Statements

BAUDELAIRE NDONG ELLA, President of the Human Rights Council, said that a panel discussion on the issue of the safety of journalists would be held this morning. The Human Rights Council had expressed deep concern at the frequent violations of the human rights of journalists taking the form of murder, torture, enforced disappearances, intimidation and harassment, among others, aimed at making the work of journalists difficult. The Council had decided to convene at its twenty-sixth session a panel discussion, focused on the conclusions of the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights related to the safety of journalists.

NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in an opening statement said that sound, bold and independent journalism was vital in any democratic society. It ensured transparency and accountability in the conduct of public affairs and other matters of public interest, and was the lifeblood that fuelled the full and informed participation of all individuals in political life and decision making processes. The safety of journalists was simply essential to the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of all, as well as the right to development. However, more than 1,000 journalists had been killed since 1992 as a direct result of their profession. Among the deadliest years were 2012 and 2013, and at least 15 journalists had been killed since the start of this year. In many States, the perpetrators could virtually count on impunity. Many more journalists had faced violence, harassment and intimidation, including abduction, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, expulsion, illegal surveillance, torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, and sexual violence against women journalists. They had been tried on spurious grounds such as espionage, threats to national security or alleged bias.
In recent years, there had been increased international awareness of the frequency with which journalists were attacked because of their work, and the need to ensure greater protection. The Security Council, General Assembly, and Human Rights Council had adopted resolutions condemning attacks against journalists and called upon all States to act on their legal obligations to promote a safe and enabling environment for journalists, so that they could perform their work independently and without undue interference. As requested by the Council, the Office presented at the Council’s twenty-fourth session a report on good practices in the protection of journalists, including the prevention of attacks and the fight against impunity. Today’s panel discussion, it was hoped, would be a platform to share experiences and ideas about how best to put those key points into practice. The international legal framework for the protection of journalists was in place. It now had to be implemented at the national level. Linked to the issue of political commitment was the question of who could be considered to be a journalist. From a human rights perspective, it was clear. All individuals were entitled to the full protection of their human rights, whether the State recognized them as journalists or not; whether they were professional reporters or citizen journalists; whether or not they had a degree in journalism; and whether they reported online or offline. States were urged to approach the issue under discussion from this human rights perspective, and to protect journalists and other media workers in the broadest sense.

Statements by Panellists

GHIDA FAKHRY, Journalist and Panel Moderator, said that journalism was a pillar of a modern society, and also a human rights pillar. It sometimes came with a very high price tag and was a risky business in many parts of the world, as highlighted by the High Commissioner for Human Rights in her opening remarks. The purpose of the panel today was to identify best practices to ensure the safety of journalists and to discuss their implementation: what States, international organizations and the Human Rights Council could do, but also what journalists themselves could do to mitigate the risks. Another key question for debate was who a journalist was today.

FRANK SMYTH, Journalist and Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, said that more needed to be done to protect journalists. The greatest threat to the safety of journalists was unsolved murders: two out of three of all journalists killed were murdered and no one was prosecuted at all. This was the issue that needed to be addressed and impunity for murders of journalists and safety of journalists must be connected. Concrete steps must be taken to address murders, and to do so, more transparency was needed as was an adequate and due judicial process.

GHIDA FAKHRY, Panel moderator, said that nine out of ten attacks on journalists went unpunished and asked about steps to ensure that international safety standards were observed and to create a safety mechanism for journalists.

GETACHEW ENGIDA, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said that the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization had developed a plan for the safety of journalists, but this plan was unfortunately still on paper; impunity was still the name of the game. In order to implement the plan, real political commitment from the leaders was needed, as were adjustments in the legal system. Answering the moderator’s question about the need for transparency and accountability, Mr. Engida said that UNESCO actively sought information from its Member States, and stressed the limitations of a United Nations organization which did not have law enforcement capacities.

DUNJA MIJATOVIC, Representative of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe on Freedom of the Media, said that an answer could not be given as to why States were not complying with their commitments. They had to find out how to engage more with States and how to be able to open the doors where the doors were closed when it came to impunity. While the number of killed journalists was a concern, they had to say the names of journalists that were killed, not just mention numbers. The safety of journalists was extremely important. Why this profession was fiercely attacked was also something to be discussed. There was a need for a stronger voice when it came to condemning countries that were not doing what they should be doing on this issue.

ABEER SAADY, Journalist and Vice-President of the Syndicate of Journalists of Egypt, said that when talking about journalism, this was very broad. Defining a journalist was very difficult and a challenge but the idea of the profession was to inform people, and allow them to make more informed decisions. In the Middle East, at this particular time, there were difficulties. Investment in the safety of journalists was a very big investment in the region. They should not be looking at the short term, but at the long term. Having worked in many countries in the region, it was found that there were things in common between those countries. The political issue was very foggy and journalists were facing many challenges. The issue was not whether to put the badge of being a journalist or not, which could lead to a likelihood of targeting. Ninety per cent of journalists killed in the region were shot in the head or were tortured before death. They were not numbers but persons with names. If they stayed as numbers, they would be forgotten. Addressing the needs of local journalists, not just international journalists, was also important, as they lived in those difficult areas, and really needed to be protected.

FRANK LA RUE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said that something that was not very clear in the conversation was that it was true that all individuals around the world had the same rights and deserved the same protection, but some individuals faced a special danger and special risk and therefore deserved special protection. It was the responsibility of the State to ensure this protection, regardless of whether the perpetrator was a State or non-State actor. There had to be a position taken on freedom of the press, emergency mechanisms, legal measures, and an eradication of impunity. There should be moments when cases on which information was received were voiced out. However, there also had to be preventive measures. The same way the United Nations had a Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, the moment was right for a United Nations declaration on journalists. As he had proposed two years ago, every single State should have an emergency mechanism in place for human rights defenders and journalists.

FRANK SMYTH, Journalist and Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, said that the overwhelming majority of journalists murdered were local journalists, at a high rate which was unacceptable. It was important to have training both for journalists covering conflicts as well as for the armed forces with whom they interacted. Local investigative journalists were often at the front lines, journalists had been murdered for investigating human rights abuses and, more recently, were facing violence for covering criminal activities and in some cases links to government officials.

ABEER SAADY, Journalist and Vice-President of the Syndicate of Journalists of Egypt, emphasised the challenges faced by female journalists. It was not only rape or harassment but also defamation, which was very important in some local contexts. In the case of regional female war reporters, it was important to guarantee their safety. Hate speech was often promoted against them as well as violence targeting female journalists.

GETACHEW ENGIDA, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), responding to a question concerning tangible success of the plan of action, highlighted some encouraging results such as initiatives to change practices and laws. Much more needed to be done, particularly in the context of acts of violence against journalists.

DUNJA MIJATOVIC, Representative of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe on Freedom of the Media, responding to a question about violence against journalists in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe region, said that countries often responded to calls to address this issue by asking for time and noting country specificity. Change would not be achieved overnight and could not be taken for granted, not even in old democracies. Human rights frameworks had to be strengthened and this was part of a joint effort, including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and other organizations. Change would be very difficult without the necessary political will to address current challenges.

FRANK LA RUE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, concerning lessons from a regional perspective, said that Latin America was no exception concerning levels of violence against journalists and had engaged in creative forms of reforms. Colombia had been often cited as an example of emergency protection measures for journalists that had been successful. There was also the need to count with legal measures but this mechanism still had been able to save lives. States should place emergency mechanisms in place in order to respond. Mexico had received the recommendation to establish a special prosecutor and to specify crimes committed against journalists, so there were other ways in which law enforcement mechanisms to address these violations and prevent impunity could be implemented. Concerning the need for political will, Mr. La Rue stressed the need for a strong belief in the importance of the value of journalism.

Discussion

European Union stressed that a free and vibrant media was a cornerstone of any democracy society and called on States to ensure accountability by investigating attacks and crimes against journalists and bringing perpetrators to justice. Egypt, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, reaffirmed the Arab Group’s attachment to the need to ensure the legal and physical safety of journalists from attacks by security forces and non-State actors and looked forward to hear from States on their good practices to keep journalists safe. Russia, speaking on behalf of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, said that the digital age had brought unlimited opportunities for the dissemination of information but had also opened up the media to new forms of vulnerability and interference and this required new thinking to keep journalists safe. Russia spoke of egregious violations of human rights against journalists and television crews in Ukraine. Austria said that the issue of impunity had been recognized as the biggest obstacle to ensuring the safety of journalists and the gap between international standards and their actual implementation must be closed.

Morocco said that political will and a legislative framework must be in place to ensure the safety of journalists and fight impunity and to that end Morocco had created the National Press Council and had developed the Ethic Charter for journalists, and was also providing for the certification of journalists. Unequivocal political will was a prerequisite, stressed Brazil, and that was why Brazil had created a Working Group on journalists which came up with recommendations to the Government to ensure that journalists worked in an enabling environment. Based on the experience of its journalists, Estonia suggested that there might be a need for a specific international action code to protect journalists from arbitrary actions in some countries. Tunisia said it systematically renounced and prosecuted all acts of violence against journalists, which had mainly been committed by non-State actors, and asked whether there was a need to further strengthen international and national legal framework for journalist protection.

Montenegro shared information about measures taken to address violence against women journalists and asked the panellists about best domestic measures to prevent attacks against journalists. Ecuador said it had a Responsible Journalist Prize which covered five categories of journalism and would be awarded in September 2014. In addition to political will and the legislation in place to protect human rights defenders, union leaders, judges and journalists, Colombia said it had set up the national protection unit within the Office of Attorney General, which now offered protection schemes to over 100 journalists. Article XIX said that often, murder was the last signpost of failed protection and impunity was the greatest obstacle to the safety of journalists. International Federation of Journalists welcomed the timely discussion today and urged the Human Rights Council to give urgent attention to the safety of journalists in the Central African Republic. Press Emblem Campaign stressed that an independent international mechanism accessible to journalists and their families would be the right step in combating impunity.

GHIDA FAKHRY, Journalist and Panel Moderator, said that it was safe to say that there was an unusual level of consensus in the room, at least on the issue of publicly stating a need to protect journalists. The only big gap was on how to do it. What was echoed was how to ensure that the international community and international organizations and civil society could put pressure on States if they failed to meet their obligations.

FRANK LA RUE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said that when States failed in their obligations, it was important to use all forms to call their attention. In the Human Rights Council, there had been a big discussion about how far should reporting go. There should be an element of further disclosure. The feeling was that that in itself was not enough. In the United Nations Joint Plan of Action, there was talk of a joint United Nations agency effort on a concentrated list of actions and verifying the process in which attacks against journalists were occurring, so that there could be a database, which could also be published. There were problems of privacy and security of journalists, but this was an issue that should be looked at.

GETACHEW ENGIDA, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, did not believe that it was time to have a legal instrument. There were sufficient international instruments. There was a lack of action on the ground and there was a lack of sufficient political commitment and will. To get this, pressure had to be kept at different angles, including pressure on a continuous basis on Governments to fulfil their commitments.

DUNJA MIJATOVIC, Representative of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on Freedom of the Media, said that rights on and offline were the same and there should not be engagement in too much work on defining journalism and who was or was not a journalist. Governments needed to have more engagement with non-governmental organizations. In too many countries, there was a lack of communication and contact with non-governmental organizations working on the protection of journalists. Guidelines were produced by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in order to help journalists; they also contained recommendations for Governments. However, there was simply a lack of political will that had to be addressed in a more direct and open way.

FRANK LA RUE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, strongly believed that political will internally was critically important. Every State had to take upon itself its responsibilities. It was important to respect the principle of privacy and anonymity of journalists, and to have an ombudsman or rapporteur in every single country or in regional bodies.

FRANK SMYTH, Journalist and Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, said that action had to come from Member States at the ground level, within their own nations. Another United Nations instrument was not needed. What was needed was transparency. There had been a discussion about abuses being committed in Ukraine. There were other cases as well, such as in Russia. Local action was needed. States had to put their values in action in terms of what they were doing on the ground. Providing judicial information on attacks on journalists, especially on the ground, was one of the first steps to be taken.

ABEER SAADY, Journalist and Vice-President of the Syndicate of Journalists of Egypt, speaking about civil society, said that in some countries, journalists did not have syndicates that represented them. Civil society had to work on this recognised right. It was not possible to have good governance and accountability without a free-flow of information and the right of civil society to work on the ground, with freedom of expression. Without the flow of information or freedom of expression, there was nothing on the ground. Journalists mainly worked on those issues.

GETACHEW ENGIDA, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said that UNESCO was a very small organization with a big mandate. To translate the mandate into practice it needed partnership from different parts of society. Without this, it was difficult to practice the free-flow of information and for that reason UNESCO considered its partnerships critically important for the free-flow of information to expand, develop, and further strengthen.

Algeria thanked participants for sharing good practices and reiterated journalists’ contributions to society, as well as for ensuring democracy and good governance. In Algeria freedom of expression was enshrined in the Constitution. Slovenia said that the safety of journalists had to be ensured while covering mass demonstrations, conflicts or crises; this was essential to ensure their work. Journalists played an important role in society and their protection was therefore in the public interest. Mexico said that the safety of communicators was of importance and Mexico since 2012 had had a protection mechanism for human right defenders and journalists, which adopted specific measures on particular cases; additionally, the office of a special prosecutor for the attention of crimes committed against journalists had been created. Lithuania stressed the agreement on ensuring the web and the protection of journalists; clarity on how to implement available tools world-wide, such as the United Nations plan of action for the safety of journalists, was needed. United Kingdom noted that the ability of journalists to operate freely was a requirement for freedom of expression and the protection of human rights, emphasising the need for States to prevent violence, carry out investigations, and bring perpetrators to justice. What were the most common challenges in closing the gap between legislative measures and implementation on the ground? Switzerland said that journalists contributed to transparency in public affairs and contributed with necessary information for democratic societies, and underscored the need of fighting impunity for perpetrators. Organisation international de la Francophonie said that it was working to integrate the objective of the protection of journalists among its priorities, and focused on the development of an environment that was conducive to the work of journalists.

United States agreed with the need for States to take clear legislative measures to prevent attacks and ensure accountability, as well as clear political will. France said that this was a subject in which both the Security Council and the Human Rights Council had a role to play as different acts of violence against journalists were on the rise. Journalists should be able to carry out their work without hindrance, and France was working with other partners to mobilise expertise in Geneva to ensure the collective implementation of practical solutions. Poland said that freedom of expression constituted a cornerstone of democratic societies. Journalists were the eyes and voices of democratic societies, giving hope to people who struggled under undemocratic regimes. Protection should cover all news providers in times of peace and conflict. Greece welcomed the panel discussion and recalled its engagement in the Security Council and the General Assembly on this topic, as it saw the safety of journalists as closely related to freedom of expression and democracy. India took note of good practices for ensuring the protection of journalists. The media played an important role in promoting accountability and as a watchdog of civil liberties but it should also be exercised with responsibility. There was a need for journalists to operate within the legal framework of their respective countries.

Eastern Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project said journalists, bloggers and other independent media voices played an important role in the promotion of human rights. Journalists from the region were routinely subject to violations of their most basic and fundamental human rights by State and non-State actors. International Humanist and Ethical Union said that an attack on a journalist violated not only the individual’s right to free expression, but also that of others to seek and obtain information. Free expression could be undermined by many mechanisms. One that still held traction was the use of subjective notions of offense and insult. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development welcomed the initiative at the international level to discuss the safety of journalists. Violence against journalists in the media and impunity continued to be a pressing concern in Southeast Asia and it was recommended that States take appropriate and immediate steps.

Portugal said freedom of expression and opinion were at the core of human rights. It strongly condemned attacks and the prosecution of journalists, and pleaded for the adoption of effective steps to protect journalists and ensure a safe environment for their work. China said journalists had the obligation to provide timely and truthful information and faced emergency and dangerous situations. China protected the safety of journalists in accordance with the law as long as they conducted their work in accordance with the law. Ireland said that an attack on a journalist was an attack on free society and on the values and the fundamental rights of freedom of expression and had to be understood as such. Punishment could make an essential contribution to prevention.

Czech Republic said that it provided yearly financial support to numerous projects with the aim to raise the quality of journalism and the overall media landscape. It hoped to hear about further best practices and looked forward to the summary outcome of this panel discussion. Pakistan said that a free and independent media was an important pillar of Pakistan. It was underscored that all cases of intimidation and harassment against journalists got immediate attention and were addressed by the Parliament and judiciary. Italy strongly believed that the safety and protection of journalists remained a key priority for the full implementation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. While the protection of journalists was a primary responsibility of the State, could it be elaborated on what contribution partnership with civil society could make?

GHIDA FAKHRY, Journalist and Panel Moderator, said that all statements heard today pointed to how wide the problem of safety of journalists was and noted that when speaking about the safety of journalists, many thought mainly of their physical safety, but what was often more at stake was their freedom of expression.

FRANK LA RUE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said that physical risks and dangers were obvious but it was clear that there was an increase in censorship and mechanisms to silence journalists. Decriminalizing defamation was therefore very important. There was also a need to establish corporate responsibility of big media outlets for their own journalists, their wellbeing and livelihoods. It was impossible to act freely if media were concentrated in monopolies, be they public or private.

GHIDA FAKHRY, Journalist and Panel Moderator, asked Ms. Mijatovic whether there was a need to give a specific human rights focus to the issue of the safety of journalists and frame the issue in human rights terms.

DUNJA MIJATOVIC, Representative of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe on Freedom of the Media, said that a human rights approach to the safety of journalists was important and many organizations were already employing this approach. Ms. Mijatovic stressed that often forgotten was the need for psychological support for journalists working in conflict zones and how States could help in providing this support. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe was now focused on the treatment of journalists in Ukraine, where over 300 case of abuse had been reported. In a situation like this, it was imperative to act and not talk about new international conventions.

Turning to Mr. Engida, GHIDA FAKHRY, Journalist and Panel Moderator, asked how technical assistance from the United Nations and regional organizations helped States and whether more United Nations Special Rapporteurs should look into freedom of expression and the safety of journalists. How could the United Nations help navigate the difficult environment in which journalists operated?

GETACHEW ENGIDA, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said that the United Nations agencies should continue to strengthen their technical assistance to Member States and States should ensure that freedom of speech was respected. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization was pushing for the post-2015 development agenda to include freedom of expression, the rule of law and good governance as a stand-alone goal. Mr. Engida referred States to consult the recent UNESCO report on freedom of expression, which also addressed the issue of gender and freedom of expression. The United Nations agencies were not the only actors, global and regional partnerships were needed with Governments and civil society.

FRANK SMYTH, Journalist and Senior Advisor for Journalist Security at the Committee to Protect Journalists, concerning root causes and the need to address impunity, said that the most important step had to do with transparency and echoed Ireland concerning State involvement, ranging from mayors to security forces. To start moving in the right direction, States which had not yet responded to UNESCO’s Director-General’s call for information should do so in order for this data to be made public. Journalists and Member States should be transparent.

ABEER SAADY, Journalist and Vice-President of the Syndicate of Journalists of Egypt, responding to the impact of restrictions and attacks on the profession, said ethics were very important. Transparency and accountability contributed to preventing further violations.

FRANK LA RUE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said that the biggest problem was impunity. After that, enhancing the possibilities for investigations should be the way forward.

DUNJA MIJATOVIC, Representative of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) on Freedom of the Media, said that States should not intervene with freedom of the media in contravention of international standards. States should also investigate any attacks.

GETACHEW ENGIDA, Deputy Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said that the main challenge was to secure a political commitment from Governments because otherwise the wide range of measures available would not really have an effect.

BAUDELAIRE NDONG ELLA, President of the Human Rights Council, thanked Ms. Fakhry for the quality of her moderation. Panellists and all the others that had participated were also thanked for their contributions.

- See more at: http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14680&LangID=E#sthash.rmnoDv0R.dpuf

The post Statement by Frank Smyth to the United Nations Human Rights Council, 26th session, Geneva, June 11, 2014 appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> Global Journalist Security Annual Report for 2013 https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2014/01/30/global-journalist-security-annual-report-for-2013/ Fri, 31 Jan 2014 01:01:44 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3751 Global Journalist Security Annual Report for 2013 The report may be easier and more pleasant to read here: http://us5.campaign-archive1.com/?u=5fc35d90c6ab4966f586a9d04&id=d76b2e8415&e=f9c4fd20c8 Executive Summary -- We had a banner year. GJS received U.S. State Department funds to help train journalists from three regions. We expanded our training courses for nonprofit agencies and news organizations in the Washington, D.C.-area. We traveled to East Africa to provide on-location training. We set a standard for giving back by providing either pro bono or heavily discounted training to both freelance journalists and humanitarian professionals. We produced guides on digital and physical security for journalists for a top U.S. J-School. We presented at events from the UNESCO conference in San Jose, Costa Rica, to the Arab Investigative Journalism Network conference in Amman, Jordan. Narrative Report GJS, after a competitive process, earned a subcontractor position to help design, launch and provide initial training for the U.S. State Department-funded Securing Access to Free Expression or SAFE journalist security program. Based in El Salvador, Kenya, and Georgia, the one-year pilot program was conceived with GJS input to help regional journalists facing several distinct threats: organized crime and targeted violence, terrorism and sectarian strife, and civil unrest and state surveillance. GJS further proposed a strategy for the journalist networks to forge solidarity within and across nations to help deter attacks. GJS Executive Director Frank Smyth used contacts dating to the 1980s to recruit the Jesuit-run University of Central America in San Salvador to partner with the State Department SAFE program. During its launch, senior officials from the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and the nonprofit group IREX implementing the program selected GJS’ Smyth to represent the U.S.-government-funded SAFE program. Speaking at a diplomatic forum at the Salvadoran Foreign Ministry, while seated next to then-U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary Jane Zimmerman, Smyth explained and defended the SAFE program’s prior conception and strategic objectives in Spanish as he fielded questions from senior diplomats representing El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. In Washington, GJS provided comprehensive training over two weeks to journalists from three continents for the SAFE program. GJS senior trainers included former British commando and Sandhurst Royal Military Academy Instructor Paul Burton, the computer scientist and digital safety and human rights expert Arturo Blair, the personal safety and self-care expert Sara Salam, the former U.S. Army tactical leader and self-defense expert Cary Ingram, and the former U.S. Secret Service surveillance and terrorism expert Mark Basil. Over the year, GJS expanded its course schedule to offer a 2-Day Refresher, a 3-Day Essential Skills, and a 5-Day comprehensive HEFAT or Hostile Environments & Emergency First-Aid course. We established relationships with new clients from the United States Institute of Peace to Getty Images. GJS is now an approved provider of HEFAT training for U.S. government-funded nonprofit agencies. We also announced two new, unique courses: Avoidance, Deterrence and Escape Training or ADET for assault-risk environments, and Compassion Fatigue & Emotional Self-Care for journalists and human rights, press freedom and other humanitarian professionals. In southern Europe and the Middle East, GJS continued to provide customized, on-location digital safety training for nonprofit and journalist groups headed into heavy state surveillance environments in North Africa. In sub-Saharan Africa, GJS began on-location training in Kampala, Uganda. We trained a group from the International Women's Media Foundation en route to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We are holding another class in Kampala in March 2014 for IWMF and other clients. (We are also seeking donors to help fund training in Kampala for African journalists. At GJS we have proven our ability to provide top quality training with minimal overhead, to be far more cost-efficient than either our large nonprofit or commercial competitors. To inquire about our Kampala classes, please see the contact information below.) We helped freelance journalists and humanitarians by providing either pro bono or heavily discounted training to four freelance journalists and two humanitarian workers in 2013, keeping our promise to train one qualified freelance professional newsgatherer or humanitarian for every twelve or fewer paid clients. One GJS beneficiary, Erin Luhmann, wrote about her training experience before heading to sub-Saharan Africa to report alongsideNew York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. (We provided her with discounted training before we learned of her plans.) Another journalist, Cecilia D’Anastasio, whom we employed as an actor, wrote about GJS' unique approach to training in Columbia Journalism Review. In Central America, GJS' Smyth spoke at the UNESCO World Press Freedom Day conference on journalist safety and impunity for attacks on the press. In New York, GJS helped lead a workshop on operational security and digital safety for journalists at Columbia University's Tow Center for Journalism. In the Middle East, GJS senior trainer and former U.S. Army Ranger and conflict journalist Drew Brown helped lead a workshop on covering civil unrest and conflict for the Arab Investigative Journalism Network. Online, GJS produced two well-received guides on digital and physical safety, respectively, for the Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism's National Security Zone. Finally, the nonprofit Committee to Protect Journalists released a Russian version of its Journalist Security Guide written by GJS' Smyth and colleague and digital safety expert Danny O’Brien in advance of the Sochi Winter Olympics. (Smyth remains CPJ’s Senior Advisor for Journalist Security where he also blogs; in February he wrote a blog about news blackouts for journalists held captive that was well-received.) The guide was already available in English, Arabic, Spanish, French and Somali. We are grateful to our clients and partners for making 2013, GJS' second year of operations, a success. We wish our friends around the world well in 2014. We remain mindful of those journalists and other colleagues who are in prison or missing, or who have fallen. Look for GJS news to come. We are about to unveil a customized, state-of-the-art audio and visual hostile environments training simulation system that we expect will be unmatched throughout the industry for its unique combination of realism and safety. Later in the year we expect to establish a nonprofit foundation to help further support security training for freelance journalists and humanitarians. www.journalistsecurity.net

The post Global Journalist Security Annual Report for 2013 appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]>

Global Journalist Security
Annual Report for 2013
The report may be easier and more pleasant to read here:
Executive Summary
--
We had a banner year. GJS received U.S. State Department funds to help train journalists from three regions. We expanded our training courses for nonprofit agencies and news organizations in the Washington, D.C.-area. We traveled to East Africa to provide on-location training. We set a standard for giving back by providing either pro bono or heavily discounted training to both freelance journalists and humanitarian professionals. We produced guides on digital and physical security for journalists for a top U.S. J-School. We presented at events from the UNESCO conference in San Jose, Costa Rica, to the Arab Investigative Journalism Network conference in Amman, Jordan.

Narrative Report

GJS, after a competitive process, earned a subcontractor position to help design, launch and provide initial training for the U.S. State Department-funded Securing Access to Free Expression or SAFE journalist security program. Based in El Salvador, Kenya, and Georgia, the one-year pilot program was conceived with GJS input to help regional journalists facing several distinct threats: organized crime and targeted violence, terrorism and sectarian strife, and civil unrest and state surveillance. GJS further proposed a strategy for the journalist networks to forge solidarity within and across nations to help deter attacks.

GJS Executive Director Frank Smyth used contacts dating to the 1980s to recruit the Jesuit-run University of Central America in San Salvador to partner with the State Department SAFE program. During its launch, senior officials from the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and the nonprofit group IREX implementing the program selected GJS’ Smyth to represent the U.S.-government-funded SAFE program. Speaking at a diplomatic forum at the Salvadoran Foreign Ministry, while seated next to then-U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary Jane Zimmerman, Smyth explained and defended the SAFE program’s prior conception and strategic objectives in Spanish as he fielded questions from senior diplomats representing El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

In Washington, GJS provided comprehensive training over two weeks to journalists from three continents for the SAFE program. GJS senior trainers included former British commando and Sandhurst Royal Military Academy Instructor Paul Burton, the computer scientist and digital safety and human rights expert Arturo Blair, the personal safety and self-care expert Sara Salam, the former U.S. Army tactical leader and self-defense expert Cary Ingram, and the former U.S. Secret Service surveillance and terrorism expert Mark Basil.

Over the year, GJS expanded its course schedule to offer a 2-Day Refresher, a 3-Day Essential Skills, and a 5-Day comprehensive HEFAT or Hostile Environments & Emergency First-Aid course. We established relationships with new clients from the United States Institute of Peace to Getty Images. GJS is now an approved provider of HEFAT training for U.S. government-funded nonprofit agencies. We also announced two new, unique courses: Avoidance, Deterrence and Escape Training or ADET for assault-risk environments, and Compassion Fatigue & Emotional Self-Care for journalists and human rights, press freedom and other humanitarian professionals.

In southern Europe and the Middle East, GJS continued to provide customized, on-location digital safety training for nonprofit and journalist groups headed into heavy state surveillance environments in North Africa.

In sub-Saharan Africa, GJS began on-location training in Kampala, Uganda. We trained a group from the International Women's Media Foundation en route to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We are holding another class in Kampala in March 2014 for IWMF and other clients. (We are also seeking donors to help fund training in Kampala for African journalists. At GJS we have proven our ability to provide top quality training with minimal overhead, to be far more cost-efficient than either our large nonprofit or commercial competitors. To inquire about our Kampala classes, please see the contact information below.)

We helped freelance journalists and humanitarians by providing either pro bono or heavily discounted training to four freelance journalists and two humanitarian workers in 2013, keeping our promise to train one qualified freelance professional newsgatherer or humanitarian for every twelve or fewer paid clients. One GJS beneficiary, Erin Luhmann, wrote about her training experience before heading to sub-Saharan Africa to report alongsideNew York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. (We provided her with discounted training before we learned of her plans.) Another journalist, Cecilia D’Anastasio, whom we employed as an actor, wrote about GJS' unique approach to training in Columbia Journalism Review.

In Central America, GJS' Smyth spoke at the UNESCO World Press Freedom Day conference on journalist safety and impunity for attacks on the press.

In New York, GJS helped lead a workshop on operational security and digital safety for journalists at Columbia University's Tow Center for Journalism.

In the Middle East, GJS senior trainer and former U.S. Army Ranger and conflict journalist Drew Brown helped lead a workshop on covering civil unrest and conflict for the Arab Investigative Journalism Network.

Online, GJS produced two well-received guides on digital and physical safety, respectively, for the Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism's National Security Zone.

Finally, the nonprofit Committee to Protect Journalists released a Russian version of its Journalist Security Guide written by GJS' Smyth and colleague and digital safety expert Danny O’Brien in advance of the Sochi Winter Olympics. (Smyth remains CPJ’s Senior Advisor for Journalist Security where he also blogs; in February he wrote a blog about news blackouts for journalists held captive that was well-received.) The guide was already available in English, Arabic, Spanish, French and Somali.

We are grateful to our clients and partners for making 2013, GJS' second year of operations, a success. We wish our friends around the world well in 2014. We remain mindful of those journalists and other colleagues who are in prison or missing, or who have fallen.

Look for GJS news to come. We are about to unveil a customized, state-of-the-art audio and visual hostile environments training simulation system that we expect will be unmatched throughout the industry for its unique combination of realism and safety.

Later in the year we expect to establish a nonprofit foundation to help further support security training for freelance journalists and humanitarians.

The post Global Journalist Security Annual Report for 2013 appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> Medill J-School (GJS’ Smyth): Security in Hostile Environments https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/08/29/medill-j-school-gjs-smyth-security-in-hostile-environments/ Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:40:45 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3595 http://nationalsecurityzone.org/site/security-for-hostile-environments/

The post Medill J-School (GJS’ Smyth): Security in Hostile Environments appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://nationalsecurityzone.org/site/security-for-hostile-environments/

The post Medill J-School (GJS’ Smyth): Security in Hostile Environments appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> NYT: American Tells of Odyssey as Prisoner of Syrian Rebels https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/08/23/american-tells-of-odyssey-as-prisoner-of-syrian-rebels/ Sat, 24 Aug 2013 00:34:00 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3589 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/world/middleeast/american-tells-of-odyssey-as-prisoner-of-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0  

The post NYT: American Tells of Odyssey as Prisoner of Syrian Rebels appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/world/middleeast/american-tells-of-odyssey-as-prisoner-of-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

The post NYT: American Tells of Odyssey as Prisoner of Syrian Rebels appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> CPJ: (GJS’ Mark Basil) Surveillance detection for journalists in the field https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/07/22/cpj-gjs-mark-basil-surveillance-detection-for-journalists-in-the-field/ Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:37:45 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3593 http://www.cpj.org/security/2013/07/surveillance-detection-for-journalists-in-the-fiel.php

The post CPJ: (GJS’ Mark Basil) Surveillance detection for journalists in the field appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://www.cpj.org/security/2013/07/surveillance-detection-for-journalists-in-the-fiel.php

The post CPJ: (GJS’ Mark Basil) Surveillance detection for journalists in the field appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> Digital Safety for National Security Reporters https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/07/03/digital-safety-for-national-security-reporters/ Wed, 03 Jul 2013 16:18:45 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3562 Global Journalist Security is offering Digital Safety for National Security Reporters Washington, DC To be announced; If interested please send an email to GJS@journalistsecurity.net, or call Frank at 202-352-1736. (Private, newsroom-specific classes are also available upon request.) The course is designed for journalists operating in today's NSA high-surveillance environment. Those who take this class will also come away with the knowledge and skills they need to begin protecting their information and sources. The course will cover: digital security concepts and caveats threat modeling operational security choosing and using tools. The format will be a mixture of presentations and interactive exercises. If interested, please send an email to GJS@journalistsecurity.net, or call Frank at 202-352-1736.

The post Digital Safety for National Security Reporters appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> Global Journalist Security is offering

Digital Safety for National Security Reporters

Washington, DC

To be announced; If interested please send an email to GJS@journalistsecurity.net, or call Frank at 202-352-1736.

(Private, newsroom-specific classes are also available upon request.)

EdwardSnowdenfromTV

The course is designed for journalists operating in today's NSA high-surveillance environment. Those who take this class will also come away with the knowledge and skills they need to begin protecting their information and sources. The course will cover:

  • digital security concepts and caveats
  • threat modeling
  • operational security
  • choosing and using tools.

The format will be a mixture of presentations and interactive exercises.

If interested, please send an email to GJS@journalistsecurity.net, or call Frank at 202-352-1736.

The post Digital Safety for National Security Reporters appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> WSJ: Phones Leave a Telltale Trail https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/06/15/wsj-phones-leave-a-telltale-trail/ Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:20:29 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3374 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324049504578545352803220058.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_3 U.S. NEWS Updated June 14, 2013, 7:28 p.m. ET Phones Leave a Telltale Trail Article Comments (74) MORE IN US » smaller Larger facebook twitter google plus linked in Email Print Save↓ More By EVAN PEREZ and SIOBHAN GORMAN The April robbery at the Cartier store in Chevy Chase, Md., was brazen and quick. After grabbing 13 watches valued at $131,000, the suspects fled in a waiting car and melted into traffic. It was one of more than a dozen similar capers that had stumped police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. But, in recent weeks, the FBI was able to arrest two men. Cellphone records from Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA and Sprint Nextel Corp. placed the suspects near the Cartier store at the time of the robbery, as well as near other heists, the FBI alleged in court filings. The T-Mobile records also allegedly showed the phone moving along the same path traveled by the suspects as police chased them. Enlarge Image ReutersPaula Broadwell's affair with former CIA Director David Petraeus was uncovered last year as a result of phone metadata in a stalking inquiry. This kind of information is at the center of the debate unleashed after a contractor leaked the details of the National Security Agency's phone-data collection program. The NSA program wasn't used in the ongoing robbery investigation, but the concept is the same. The so-called metadata represents one element of the voluminous digital trail left by most Americans in their daily lives. Each individual crumb might seem insignificant, but combined and analyzed, this data gives police and spies alike one of the most powerful investigative tools ever devised. The data doesn't include the speech in a phone call or words in an email, but includes almost everything else, including the model of the phone and the "to" and "from" lines in emails. By tracing metadata, investigators can pinpoint a suspect's location to specific floors of buildings. They can electronically map a person's contacts, and their contacts' contacts. More Senator Discusses Why NSA Powers Should Be Curbed The Numbers Guy: Ethics Aside, Is NSA's Spy Tool Efficient? Holder Says Prism Subject to Oversight   The NSA, through secret court orders served to U.S. telecommunications firms, scoops up metadata relating to almost all calls made into and within the U.S., which it can later query as part of a terror investigation. U.S. officials say that kind of work, in concert with other techniques, has helped thwart "dozens" of terrorist plots in the U.S. and overseas. Critics charge it represents an invasion of privacy. The typical smartphone user can give off a total of nearly 100 pieces of highly technical data through calls, texts and other activities, according to research by Tracy Ann Kosa, a digital-privacy expert at the University of Ontario. This information includes the time that phones make contact with cellphone towers, the direction of the tower with respect to the phone and the signal strength at the time. Ms. Kosa said much of the data is "insignificant on its own." But "every little piece counts," she said. "Think of it like footsteps—or calories." One of the most dramatic examples of how metadata can be used came in the criminal investigation that separately uncovered retired Gen. David Petraeus's extramarital affair and ended his tenure as Central Intelligence Agency director. An FBI investigation into a stalking complaint led agents to obtain location data from email addresses used to send the alleged threats, according to U.S. law-enforcement officials. FBI agents discovered the sender had used computers at a several hotels. Agents asked the hotels to provide lists of guests who'd used business centers around that time. That led them to Paula Broadwell, Mr. Petraeus's biographer. The data was used as probable cause to obtain a court order to monitor Ms. Broadwell's email accounts. Agents soon realized from her emails that the two were having an affair. Enlarge Image The woman who received the allegedly harassing emails, Tampa socialite Jill Kelley, said in a lawsuit filed later against the FBI that the bureau's investigation took off after agents took a single IP address from an email sent to her last June. The FBI said it closed the stalking investigation without filing any charges. A U.S. law-enforcement official said the Petraeus case should not lead to privacy worries. The official said law enforcement is required to have a specific investigative purpose to collect and look at metadata. Intelligence and law-enforcement agencies have been using metadata in their investigations for decades. Central Intelligence Agency officers routinely rifle through so-called pocket litter found on captured terrorist suspects and give information such as phone numbers to the NSA. A cat-and-mouse game has evolved, with terror suspects frequently swapping SIM cards, or phone identification cards, to confuse intelligence agencies, former officials said. The U.S. has countered by devising how to monitor the phone and the SIM card separately. "You keep pulling the thread. It's critical stuff," one former senior intelligence official said. "In every major terrorist operation or capture operation, metadata has played a huge role." Some of the most important metadata, cellphone location information, varies depending on the area covered by a cell tower. In rural areas, one tower may serve wide swaths of territory, but in urban areas, towers are more targeted. The number of cellular base stations that serve a single floor of an office building equaled or surpassed the number of standard cell towers in 2010 and continues to grow, University of Pennsylvania engineering professor Matt Blaze told Congress last year. The increase in metadata has transformed the way intelligence agencies conduct investigations with domestic data. Traditionally, investigators had to meet various legal standards to collect any data, such as connecting the data they wanted to seize with a specific suspect. Under the NSA phone program, the government collects domestic phone metadata without a specific investigative lead. Trained analysts only search the database in conjunction with a terrorism investigation, authorities say. Intelligence agencies "basically reimpose at the level of analysis the standards you might ideally […]

The post WSJ: Phones Leave a Telltale Trail appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324049504578545352803220058.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_3

  • U.S. NEWS
  • Updated June 14, 2013, 7:28 p.m. ET

Phones Leave a Telltale Trail

MORE IN US »

By EVAN PEREZ and SIOBHAN GORMAN

The April robbery at the Cartier store in Chevy Chase, Md., was brazen and quick. After grabbing 13 watches valued at $131,000, the suspects fled in a waiting car and melted into traffic. It was one of more than a dozen similar capers that had stumped police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

But, in recent weeks, the FBI was able to arrest two men. Cellphone records from Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA and Sprint Nextel Corp. placed the suspects near the Cartier store at the time of the robbery, as well as near other heists, the FBI alleged in court filings. The T-Mobile records also allegedly showed the phone moving along the same path traveled by the suspects as police chased them.

ReutersPaula Broadwell's affair with former CIA Director David Petraeus was uncovered last year as a result of phone metadata in a stalking inquiry.

This kind of information is at the center of the debate unleashed after a contractor leaked the details of the National Security Agency's phone-data collection program. The NSA program wasn't used in the ongoing robbery investigation, but the concept is the same. The so-called metadata represents one element of the voluminous digital trail left by most Americans in their daily lives. Each individual crumb might seem insignificant, but combined and analyzed, this data gives police and spies alike one of the most powerful investigative tools ever devised.

The data doesn't include the speech in a phone call or words in an email, but includes almost everything else, including the model of the phone and the "to" and "from" lines in emails. By tracing metadata, investigators can pinpoint a suspect's location to specific floors of buildings. They can electronically map a person's contacts, and their contacts' contacts.

The NSA, through secret court orders served to U.S. telecommunications firms, scoops up metadata relating to almost all calls made into and within the U.S., which it can later query as part of a terror investigation. U.S. officials say that kind of work, in concert with other techniques, has helped thwart "dozens" of terrorist plots in the U.S. and overseas. Critics charge it represents an invasion of privacy.

The typical smartphone user can give off a total of nearly 100 pieces of highly technical data through calls, texts and other activities, according to research by Tracy Ann Kosa, a digital-privacy expert at the University of Ontario. This information includes the time that phones make contact with cellphone towers, the direction of the tower with respect to the phone and the signal strength at the time.

Ms. Kosa said much of the data is "insignificant on its own." But "every little piece counts," she said. "Think of it like footsteps—or calories."

One of the most dramatic examples of how metadata can be used came in the criminal investigation that separately uncovered retired Gen. David Petraeus's extramarital affair and ended his tenure as Central Intelligence Agency director.

An FBI investigation into a stalking complaint led agents to obtain location data from email addresses used to send the alleged threats, according to U.S. law-enforcement officials. FBI agents discovered the sender had used computers at a several hotels. Agents asked the hotels to provide lists of guests who'd used business centers around that time. That led them to Paula Broadwell, Mr. Petraeus's biographer. The data was used as probable cause to obtain a court order to monitor Ms. Broadwell's email accounts. Agents soon realized from her emails that the two were having an affair.

The woman who received the allegedly harassing emails, Tampa socialite Jill Kelley, said in a lawsuit filed later against the FBI that the bureau's investigation took off after agents took a single IP address from an email sent to her last June. The FBI said it closed the stalking investigation without filing any charges.

A U.S. law-enforcement official said the Petraeus case should not lead to privacy worries. The official said law enforcement is required to have a specific investigative purpose to collect and look at metadata.

Intelligence and law-enforcement agencies have been using metadata in their investigations for decades. Central Intelligence Agency officers routinely rifle through so-called pocket litter found on captured terrorist suspects and give information such as phone numbers to the NSA.

A cat-and-mouse game has evolved, with terror suspects frequently swapping SIM cards, or phone identification cards, to confuse intelligence agencies, former officials said. The U.S. has countered by devising how to monitor the phone and the SIM card separately.

"You keep pulling the thread. It's critical stuff," one former senior intelligence official said. "In every major terrorist operation or capture operation, metadata has played a huge role."

Some of the most important metadata, cellphone location information, varies depending on the area covered by a cell tower. In rural areas, one tower may serve wide swaths of territory, but in urban areas, towers are more targeted.

The number of cellular base stations that serve a single floor of an office building equaled or surpassed the number of standard cell towers in 2010 and continues to grow, University of Pennsylvania engineering professor Matt Blaze told Congress last year.

The increase in metadata has transformed the way intelligence agencies conduct investigations with domestic data. Traditionally, investigators had to meet various legal standards to collect any data, such as connecting the data they wanted to seize with a specific suspect.

Under the NSA phone program, the government collects domestic phone metadata without a specific investigative lead. Trained analysts only search the database in conjunction with a terrorism investigation, authorities say.

Intelligence agencies "basically reimpose at the level of analysis the standards you might ideally have for collection," said Timothy Edgar, a former top national-security privacy lawyer in the Bush and Obama administrations.

Mr. Edgar said the increasingly specific location data raises concerns about potential violations of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Once a person can be located within a building, the monitoring more closely resembles a search that would traditionally require a warrant.

The NSA program is accompanied by privacy restrictions, Obama administration officials say. To search the database, the government must have "reasonable suspicion" that the basis for the query is "associated with a foreign terrorist organization," they say. Search warrants approved by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are required before the contents of the calls may be monitored.

Some useful metadata isn't retained very long by phone companies, according to people familiar with the evidence-gathering. That could explain why in court orders phone companies have been instructed to turn over information daily.

The program's supporters note the Supreme Court has ruled the public has no reasonable expectation of privacy for information it turns over to a third party, such as a phone company. That 1979 ruling, however, predated cellphones. Moreover, cellphone technology has changed dramatically since the inception of the NSA data program in the early 2000s.

"On one hand, this could equip the government to electronically follow you around in public," said Jeremy Bash, until recently Pentagon chief of staff. "But even if they were to physically follow you around, you would not need a warrant for that," he said.

Mr. Bash added it is nonetheless "a fair question" whether metadata should trigger heightened Fourth Amendment scrutiny, because communications technology has changed so much.

"It's possible that 'dataveillance' could come under higher judicial scrutiny," he said, using a new term of art that means the ability to surveil people through their data trail.

—Devlin Barrett and Jennifer Valentino-DeVries contributed to this article.Write to Evan Perez at evan.perez@wsj.com and Siobhan Gorman atsiobhan.gorman@wsj.com

A version of this article appeared June 15, 2013, on page A1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Phones Leave A Telltale Trail.

The post WSJ: Phones Leave a Telltale Trail appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> ProPublica: Worried about the Mass Surveillance? How to Practice Safer Communication https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/06/11/propublica-worried-about-the-mass-surveillance-how-to-practice-safer-communication/ Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:26:53 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3371 http://www.propublica.org/article/worried-about-the-mass-surveillance-how-to-practice-safer-communication

The post ProPublica: Worried about the Mass Surveillance? How to Practice Safer Communication appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://www.propublica.org/article/worried-about-the-mass-surveillance-how-to-practice-safer-communication

The post ProPublica: Worried about the Mass Surveillance? How to Practice Safer Communication appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> CPJ (Smyth): Secrecy, Scale of PRISM raises alarms https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/06/07/cpjs-smyth-secrecy-scale-of-prism-raises-alarms/ Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:09:11 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3348 http://www.cpj.org/internet/2013/06/secrecy-scale-of-prism-raises-alarms.php  

The post CPJ (Smyth): Secrecy, Scale of PRISM raises alarms appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://www.cpj.org/internet/2013/06/secrecy-scale-of-prism-raises-alarms.php

 

The post CPJ (Smyth): Secrecy, Scale of PRISM raises alarms appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> CJR: Lessons for journos in the NSA revelations (Quotes GJS’ Smyth) https://www.journalistsecurity.net/2013/06/07/cjr-lessons-for-journos-in-the-nsa-revelations-quotes-gjs-smyth/ Fri, 07 Jun 2013 15:57:38 +0000 http://www.journalistsecurity.net/?p=3344 http://www.cjr.org/cloud_control/data_collection_implications_f.php?page=all  

The post CJR: Lessons for journos in the NSA revelations (Quotes GJS’ Smyth) appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]> http://www.cjr.org/cloud_control/data_collection_implications_f.php?page=all

 

The post CJR: Lessons for journos in the NSA revelations (Quotes GJS’ Smyth) appeared first on Global Journalist Security.

]]>