Using the UN Plan of Action for coordination, protection, prevention and accountability

The safety of journalists has been at the core of IMS’ work since the organisation was founded in 2001. Ensuring safe working conditions has always been seen as a fundamental element of IMS’ holistic approach to media development. The logic has always been that safer working conditions result in better journalism as journalists that feel protected will be more willing to report on even the most delicate and potentially dangerous stories; stories that the public should know about to be properly informed about their community, country or region. For IMS, safety is about more than physical safety. It is about ensuring that journalists and media are prepared to respond to threats, emergencies and crises; it is about preventing threats, attacks and harassment – and protecting journalists and media if a situation happens; and it is about prosecuting crimes when such situations take place.

When the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity was launched in 2012, it marked an important shift in how the international community understood journalist safety.

Safety could no longer be treated simply as a matter of teaching individual journalists how to protect themselves, deliver emergency responses when a crisis occurred or making global advocacy campaigns in high-profile cases. Nor could attacks against journalists be regarded as an occupational risk to be managed by the media sector alone. The UN Plan of Action recognised something more fundamental: protecting journalists requires coordinated action between different stakeholders. Between governments, law enforcement, judicial institutions, civil society and the media. Prevention and protection are the key. And when crimes occur, investigation, prosecution and accountability matter too.

For more than a decade we have had that blueprint. And around the world, plans of actions have been put into place. IMS has been instrumental in supporting the implementation of the plan in countries like the Philippines, Pakistan and Tanzania. And the lesson is that there is no one size fits all. While the blueprint might be global, the implementation of it must be locally determined.

And local ownership does not happen automatically. Building functioning multi-stakeholder systems requires sustained engagement, trust and often an intermediary capable of bringing actors together who may otherwise have little history of cooperation.

We have also learned that the best safety mechanisms consist of multiple offerings. Training matters. Emergency funds matter. Legal assistance matters. Safety coalitions and national mechanisms matter. But none is sufficient alone.

A functioning safety system connects evidence and monitoring to prevention and preparedness. It can respond rapidly when journalists face threats. It includes organisations that journalists trust and public institutions willing and able to fulfil their responsibilities. Crucially, it connects protection with investigation and accountability.

Afghanistan demonstrates the value of taking the long view. IMS and Afghan partners established the Afghan Journalists Safety Committee in 2009. It subsequently developed a presence across all 34 provinces, providing monitoring, emergency assistance, relocation and psychosocial support. And the organisation has managed to stay and continue operating even after the Taliban takeover in 2021, proving its value in the Afghan society.

In Ethiopia, another model is emerging. Annual safety assessments document physical, legal, digital and gendered threats facing journalists, while the Consortium for the Safety of Journalists and work towards a Rapid Response Safety Fund seek to connect that evidence with coordinated practical protection.

And Ukraine reminds us that in prolonged crisis, journalist safety is also about resilience. Protecting journalists means creating the conditions in which independent journalism can continue, even under extraordinary pressure.

Finally, it is important to understand that the safety of journalists is not just a media issue. It is a societal issue.

When journalists are silenced through online harassment, violence, intimidation, detention, surveillance or legal prosecution, the consequences extend far beyond the individual targeted. It creates a chilling effect on relevant and reliable information. Communities lose access to needed information. Abuses become harder to expose. Those exercising power face less scrutiny.

That is why safety is a shared concern. But shared responsibility does not mean interchangeable responsibility.

Civil society can document attacks, build coalitions, advocate, convene actors and provide assistance. Media organisations can strengthen their preparedness and duty of care. But public institutions have responsibilities that cannot be transferred to civil society. Law-enforcement institutions must protect and investigate. Prosecutors and courts are indispensable to justice. Governments must create the legal and institutional conditions in which journalists can work freely.

Accountability cannot be outsourced.

On this International Day to End Impunity, IMS therefore hopes that the next phase of the UN Plan of Action will build on what has already been achieved, while demanding more from implementation.

Words on a piece of paper only matter if action follows.

The UN Plan of Action has provided us with the blueprint. The task is now to turn it into functioning, adequately resourced, local safety systems that journalists and media can rely on, and that allow relevant and reliable information to endure.

IMS and our partners are prepared to do our part. But we cannot do it alone. Only through joint efforts can we hope to ensure prevention of threats, attacks and assaults, preparation and protection of journalists and other content producers and prosecution of crimes committed against them.