NGO Report: Israel responsible for two-thirds of journalists killed worldwide in 2025
The Silencing of Truth
International law establishes robust protections for journalists operating in conflict zones, grounded primarily in the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. Article 79 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions explicitly states that journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions in areas of armed conflict shall be considered as civilians and shall be protected as such. This provision codifies a fundamental principle: journalists are not combatants, and their professional activities do not strip them of civilian protections under international humanitarian law.
The United Nations Security Council has reinforced these protections through multiple resolutions. Resolution 1738 condemned intentional attacks against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel in situations of armed conflict as violations of international humanitarian law. More recently, Resolution 2222 reaffirmed that journalists shall be considered as civilians and shall be respected and protected as such, while emphasizing that media equipment and installations constitute civilian objects that shall not be the object of attack. The resolution further stressed that deliberate attacks against civilians constitute war crimes and called upon states to end impunity for such acts.
Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, intentionally directing attacks against civilians—including journalists—constitutes a war crime for both international and non-international conflicts. The Elements of Crimes document clarifies that perpetrators must have known the civilian status of their targets, a standard that becomes particularly relevant when military forces repeatedly strike individuals clearly identified as journalists.
The Committee to Protect Journalists report reveals a pattern of conduct by Israeli forces that appears to contravene multiple pillars of international humanitarian law. First, the deliberate targeting of journalists directly violates the principle of distinction, which requires parties to conflict to distinguish between combatants and civilians at all times. The report documents that Israel accounted for the overwhelming majority of cases of journalists murdered specifically because of their work, a statistic that suggests systematic rather than incidental harm.
Second, the use of unsubstantiated allegations to justify killings raises serious concerns under the principle of proportionality and the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of life. The report notes that Israeli officials repeatedly killed journalists whom it subsequently—and in some cases preemptively—alleged were militants, without providing credible evidence to support its claims. This pattern was evident in the killing of Hossam Shabat, a young correspondent for Al Jazeera Mubasher, who was struck by an Israeli drone while traveling to a hospital; Israel accused him of being a Hamas sniper without presenting verifiable evidence. Such post-hoc justifications, offered without transparent investigation, undermine the legal requirement that attacks on individuals must be based on reasonable suspicion of direct participation in hostilities.
Third, the report highlights the increasing use of drone technology to target journalists. The precision capabilities of modern drones arguably heighten, rather than diminish, the legal obligation to verify targets' status before engaging them. When drones are used to strike individuals wearing press identification, operating near media equipment, or in known journalist gathering points, the presumption of civilian status becomes particularly compelling under international humanitarian law.
Fourth, attacks on media infrastructure compound these violations. The report documents Israeli strikes on newspaper offices that killed numerous media workers, as well as strikes on medical facilities where journalists were working. Under international law, civilian objects—including media installations—are protected from attack unless they make an effective contribution to military action. The destruction of communications infrastructure, which has hampered investigation into journalist deaths, may also violate obligations to facilitate humanitarian reporting and the flow of information to civilian populations.
The 2025 findings cannot be understood in isolation. Since October 2023, Israeli operations have killed more than 250 journalists and media workers, injured many others, and detained nearly 100, marking what the Committee to Protect Journalists describes as the deadliest period for media casualties ever recorded. This escalation builds upon a longer history of violence against journalists covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The killing of Shireen Abu Akleh, the revered Al Jazeera correspondent shot by Israeli forces in the West Bank while clearly marked as press, became a symbol of the vulnerability of journalists in the region. Multiple UN human rights experts condemned the killing and called for an independent investigation, noting that Abu Akleh was entitled to special protection under both international human rights law and international humanitarian law. The UN later acknowledged that Israeli forces used lethal force without justification in targeting her.
Human rights organizations have documented similar patterns in earlier conflicts. During Israel's 2014 military operation in Gaza, multiple journalist deaths were recorded, including strikes on buildings housing international media offices. In subsequent escalations, Israeli airstrikes on media facilities killed journalists and injured many others. These incidents, coupled with the unprecedented toll since 2023, suggest not isolated errors but a sustained disregard for the protected status of media personnel.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the report is the persistent failure to hold perpetrators accountable. The report states that no one has been held accountable for any targeted killings of a journalist by Israel in recent years. This impunity violates not only the substantive protections of international humanitarian law but also the procedural obligations under UN resolutions, which urge states to conduct impartial, independent and effective investigations and bring perpetrators of such crimes to justice.
The International Criminal Court has taken note of these concerns. Its investigation into the Situation in Palestine includes possible crimes against journalists. Reporters Without Borders has filed multiple complaints with the Court alleging war crimes against journalists, arguing that the systematic nature of the killings warrants international judicial scrutiny. These developments reflect growing recognition that domestic accountability mechanisms have proven inadequate to address violations of journalists' rights in this context.
The killing of journalists is not merely a tragedy for the individuals and their families; it represents an assault on the public's right to know and on the foundations of accountable governance. When journalists are silenced through violence, the fog of war thickens, atrocities go unreported, and the mechanisms of democratic oversight falter.
The legal frameworks protecting journalists in armed conflict are clear, comprehensive, and widely ratified. Article 79 of Additional Protocol I, UN Security Council resolutions, and the Rome Statute collectively establish that journalists are civilians entitled to protection, that their equipment is a civilian object, and that intentional attacks against them constitute war crimes. The evidence compiled by the Committee to Protect Journalists, human rights organizations, and UN experts suggests that Israeli forces have repeatedly violated these obligations in Gaza and beyond.
Addressing this crisis requires more than documentation. It demands that states fulfill their duty to investigate alleged violations impartially, that international bodies exercise their mandates to pursue accountability, and that the global community reaffirm that the protection of journalists is not a partisan issue but a cornerstone of international law and human dignity. As the Committee to Protect Journalists has warned, we are all at risk when journalists are killed for reporting the news. In an era of escalating conflict and information warfare, upholding the legal protections for those who bear witness is not optional—it is essential to the preservation of truth, justice, and peace.
Posts
