International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists
<p>On 2 November 2013, two journalists from Radio France Internationale, Ghislaine Dupont and Claude Verlon, were seized outside a house in Kidal, in northern Mali, moments after interviewing a leader of the Tuareg separatist movement. They were bundled into a vehicle, driven a short distance into the desert and shot dead. Dupont was a reporter who had spent years covering Africa; Verlon was the sound technician working alongside her. Their killers were never brought to justice. Exactly that pattern, violence against journalists followed by impunity, is what the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists, marked every 2 November, exists to confront. The date is not symbolic in the abstract. It is the anniversary of their deaths.</p>
<h2 id="where-the-day-comes-from">Where the day comes from</h2><div class="ad-unit ad-in-article" aria-label="Advertisement">
<span class="ad-label">Advertisement</span>
<ins class="adsbygoogle" style="display:block;text-align:center"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-3726833845844946"
data-ad-slot="3291553914"
data-ad-format="auto"
data-full-width-responsive="true"></ins>
<script>(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});</script>
</div>
<p>The observance was created by the United Nations General Assembly, which adopted Resolution A/RES/68/163 on 18 December 2013, only weeks after the murders in Mali. The resolution chose 2 November precisely to commemorate Dupont and Verlon, fixing the day to a specific, recent crime rather than to a general principle. That choice gave the observance an unusual concreteness: it was born not from a slogan but from two named people and an unsolved killing.</p>
<p>The resolution invited UNESCO, the UN agency with a long-standing mandate on the safety of journalists, to take a leading role in coordinating the response. UNESCO had already been working on the issue through the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, adopted in 2012, a framework designed to draw governments, media organisations and civil society into a coordinated effort. The new day became the most visible public expression of that plan.</p>
<h2 id="a-history-of-a-particular-crime-and-a-wider-pattern">A history of a particular crime, and a wider pattern</h2>
<p>The murders of Dupont and Verlon were shocking partly because of their visibility, but they were far from isolated. UNESCO keeps a running record of journalists killed for their work, and the agency’s biennial reports have repeatedly found that in roughly nine out of ten cases the perpetrators are never convicted. That figure, the impunity rate, is the statistic at the heart of the day. It describes not merely a failure of policing but a structural condition in which killing a reporter carries, in practice, almost no risk.</p>
<p>The investigation into the Mali killings illustrates how impunity takes hold even in high-profile cases. Despite the involvement of French authorities and sustained pressure from RFI and press-freedom groups, years passed with little progress, contested accounts of what happened, and no one held to account. The families and colleagues of Dupont and Verlon turned their grief into advocacy, and RFI established annual scholarships in the pair’s names in 2014 to support young journalists and technicians from Africa, ensuring the two would be remembered as more than victims.</p>
<p>The broader history the day draws on includes some of the most notorious unsolved or partially solved killings of recent decades: the Russian investigative reporter Anna Politkovskaya, shot in Moscow in 2006 on President Putin’s birthday as she investigated abuses in Chechnya; the Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, killed by a car bomb in 2017 while exposing corruption at the heart of her country’s government; and the Saudi columnist Jamal Khashoggi, murdered inside a consulate in Istanbul in 2018. Each case, in its own way, became a test of whether powerful interests could be held responsible for silencing a journalist, and the mixed results explain why the day continues to be necessary.</p>
<p>The choice to anchor the day to Dupont and Verlon rather than to a more famous name was itself meaningful. Neither was a household figure, and Verlon in particular, as a technician, represented the unglamorous support staff whose deaths rarely make headlines. By building a global observance around a working reporter and her sound engineer, the United Nations made a point about who actually bears the risk of journalism: not only celebrated columnists but the ordinary practitioners of the trade.</p>
<h2 id="why-it-matters">Why it matters</h2><div class="ad-unit ad-in-article" aria-label="Advertisement">
<span class="ad-label">Advertisement</span>
<ins class="adsbygoogle" style="display:block;text-align:center"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-3726833845844946"
data-ad-slot="3291553914"
data-ad-format="auto"
data-full-width-responsive="true"></ins>
<script>(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});</script>
</div>
<p>Impunity is corrosive in a way that goes well beyond the individual tragedy. When the killing of a reporter goes unpunished, it broadcasts a message to anyone who might be embarrassed by journalism: that violence works and carries no cost. The predictable result is self-censorship. Editors steer away from corruption, organised crime and abuses of power not because they lack courage but because they have weighed the risks and concluded, rationally, that some stories are not worth dying for.</p>
<p>The loss that follows is the public’s. A press that cannot safely investigate is a press that cannot inform, and a society deprived of reliable information cannot hold its rulers to account or make decisions on a sound basis. The day frames the safety of journalists not as a professional perk for reporters but as a precondition for the kind of open society in which citizens can know what is being done in their name.</p>
<h2 id="how-it-is-observed">How it is observed</h2>
<p>Each 2 November, press-freedom organisations, journalists’ unions, newsrooms and UN bodies hold conferences, panel discussions, training sessions and acts of remembrance. A common and deliberately confronting ritual is the reading aloud of the names of journalists killed over the past year, a refusal to let those names dissolve into statistics. Reports documenting attacks on the press are frequently released to coincide with the day, and advocacy groups use the occasion to press governments to reopen or pursue specific unsolved cases.</p>
<p>Newsrooms publish features on murdered or imprisoned colleagues, and training programmes address the practical realities of reporting on conflict, corruption and organised crime. UNESCO uses the day to highlight its own monitoring work and to remind states of the commitments they made under the Plan of Action. The Director-General issues condemnations of individual killings as they occur and requests information from the relevant government on the status of each investigation, a paper trail that the day brings into public view. Press-freedom monitors such as the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders typically release tallies of the year’s dead and imprisoned to coincide with the date, turning 2 November into an annual audit of how dangerous the work has become.</p>
<h2 id="variations-and-the-global-picture">Variations and the global picture</h2>
<p>The dangers the day addresses are not evenly distributed. UNESCO’s data consistently shows that the majority of journalists killed are local reporters working in their own countries, not foreign correspondents, and that many die outside conflict zones, targeted for investigating corruption, crime or politics. Latin America and the Arab region have been among the deadliest places for the press in recent years, and the threats have broadened well beyond murder to include arbitrary detention, online harassment, surveillance and the abuse of laws to intimidate reporters, a tactic sometimes called lawfare.</p>
<h2 id="symbols-and-traditions">Symbols and traditions</h2>
<p>The visual language of the day leans on absence: empty chairs, candlelight vigils, and displays of photographs of those who have been killed, each image standing for a voice that has been silenced. The reading of names functions as both symbol and demand, an insistence that specific, unresolved cases not be allowed to fade. The day’s particular focus on local journalists, who so often work without the protection or international attention afforded to famous correspondents, is itself a kind of statement about where the danger truly lies.</p>
<p>The day’s concern with remembrance, with keeping the murdered from being forgotten, places it close to the <a href="/specialdate/international-journalist-s-day-of-remembrance/">International Journalist’s Day of Remembrance</a>, which similarly honours those who have died for their reporting. And its underlying argument, that some acts of violence are tools of intimidation aimed at silencing an entire group, connects it to the broader struggle marked by the <a href="/specialdate/international-day-for-the-elimination-of-violence-against-women/">International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women</a>, where impunity likewise allows harm to continue unchecked.</p>
<h2 id="fun-facts">Fun facts</h2>
<ul>
<li>The day’s date was chosen barely seven weeks after the crime it commemorates, an unusually rapid response that tied the observance directly to the November 2013 murders of Ghislaine Dupont and Claude Verlon in Mali.</li>
<li>UNESCO is the only UN agency with an explicit mandate to defend freedom of expression and the safety of journalists, which is why it, rather than a more obviously security-focused body, leads the day.</li>
<li>The “impunity rate” that the day exists to lower has hovered around ninety per cent in UNESCO’s reporting, meaning roughly nine in ten killings of journalists end without anyone being convicted.</li>
<li>A large share of journalists killed are not war reporters but local journalists covering corruption, crime and local politics, often murdered far from any battlefield, which is why the day deliberately centres their cases rather than those of celebrated foreign correspondents.</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="a-closing-reflection">A closing reflection</h2>
<p>The people who order the killing of a journalist are usually betting on forgetting. They calculate that outrage will fade, that the investigation will stall, that the name will slip out of the headlines and, eventually, out of memory. A day built around the reading of names is a direct wager against that calculation. It does not pretend to deliver justice on its own; a vigil convicts no one. But it keeps the cases warm, denies the perpetrators the silence they were counting on, and insists that a reporter shot in the desert outside Kidal, or anywhere else, remains a debt the world has not yet paid.</p>
Advertisement
Related Content
Advertisement
