A run of incidents in early October, including a Channel 4 correspondent briefly refused entry, prompted a demand from CPJ for Israel to let the press work.
JERUSALEM, Israel (Journo News) – Settler attacks, detentions, a deportation and a series of entry refusals struck journalists covering Israel and the occupied West Bank within about a week, prompting the Committee to Protect Journalists to demand that Israeli authorities let reporters work free of intimidation. The cases involve photographers from AFP, a Portuguese correspondent, a Palestinian press photographer and a Channel 4 reporter from Britain, and CPJ says they point to a pattern, not a run of bad luck.
The incidents CPJ documented
CPJ’s alert, datelined Beirut on 13 October and updated on 16 October with a response from the Israeli military, sets out a sequence of events. All details below are CPJ’s account unless otherwise stated, and several rest on the testimony of the journalists involved.
- 6 October: Israeli settlers attacked AFP photographer Jaafar Ashtiyeh as he covered the West Bank olive harvest. AFP published its own report on the assault. The same day, Israeli authorities detained journalists Mohammad Abed and Mohammad Atiq.
- 8 October: A Portuguese correspondent for the independent outlet Fumaca, identified by CPJ as Ribeiro, was arrested in Rantis, northwest of Ramallah, and deported the next day. Portuguese media reported the detention of two Portuguese nationals, one a journalist.
- About two days later: Israeli troops firing rubber bullets during clashes with settlers near Ramallah struck Palestinian photojournalist Issam al-Rimawi, who said he was wearing a vest marked “Press.”
- 11 October: British journalist Secunder Kermani, working with Channel 4, was refused entry to Israel and briefly held by immigration officers before the decision was reversed.
Visas, entry and the foreign press
The alert also recorded the reported rejection of a work visa for German journalist Serena Bilanceri, who was due to become Die Tageszeitung’s correspondent. Israeli media reported that the refusal was linked to what they described as her anti-Zionist views and earlier reporting that called for sanctions on Israel, CPJ noted, and the Jerusalem Post was among the outlets it cited. Bilanceri told CPJ the rejection hampers her ability to report from the region.
CPJ also pointed back to June, when it listed at least six foreign journalists denied entry, some apparently over critical opinions, in a dedicated roundup. Taken with October’s refusals, the cases suggest that access decisions may be increasingly entangled with what a journalist has written.
What Israel has said
CPJ’s regional director, Sara Qudah, said the violations by Israeli authorities are rising in frequency and reflect a lack of accountability. CPJ said Israel’s Population and Immigration Authority did not respond at first to questions about why journalists were barred or deported. The alert was updated once the Israeli military replied about the al-Rimawi shooting. It said its troops had gone to the area after reports of a confrontation, used riot dispersal means, and regretted any harm caused to uninvolved individuals.
That response deserves weight, and so does what it leaves open. A statement that troops regret harm to uninvolved people neither confirms nor disputes that a photographer in a marked vest was hit by a rubber bullet. Nor does it address the other incidents, which involve settlers, immigration officers and visa decisions, not the military alone. We cannot independently verify each account, and the facts of individual cases will be contested.
The British dimension is worth spelling out for UK editors. Kermani’s case ended with the decision reversed and his entry allowed, according to CPJ, but even a brief hold at the border costs a broadcaster time, tests its crews and signals to every other correspondent that entry is not guaranteed. Wire photographers such as AFP’s Ashtiyeh matter for a different reason: their images and copy reach newsrooms around the world, so an attack on one is an attack on the supply of verified pictures to many outlets that never send their own staff.
Why working journalists should care
Three strands matter beyond the region. First, physical safety: a photographer attacked during a harvest and a photojournalist in a press vest hit by a projectile are reminders that visible identification does not protect anyone. Second, access: when a government decides which correspondents may enter on the basis of their opinions, the audience loses reporters who would otherwise fill gaps in coverage. Third, the risk that reporters temper what they write in order to keep their access, a chilling effect that follows naturally if entry decisions track published views.
CPJ has kept up the pressure. On 5 November it published a statement saying it was alarmed by a surge in Israeli detentions and alleged abuse of journalists, signalling that the pattern it flagged in October had not eased.
Practical steps for editors
News organizations with reporters on assignment in the area should confirm press accreditation well ahead of travel, carry paper copies of credentials and editorial letters, and agree check-in schedules with a named desk contact. Freelancers, who often lack employer legal support, should be told in advance which organizations will intervene if they are detained. Employers should also consider whether a correspondent’s past published opinions could affect a visa application, and take legal advice before applying.
Audiences can help by asking where coverage comes from and who was in position to see events. And for those who want to consume the media circus with a laugh, Bohiney Magazine and The London Prat cover it from the comedy side.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/