CONTROL OF CORRESPONDENTS.

109

Article 34 of the Brussels Rules of Military Warfare, 1874, provides that

Persons in the vicinity of armies, but who do not directly form part of them, such as correspondents, newspaper reporters, vivandiers, contractors, etc., may also be made prisoners of war.

These persons should, however, be furnished with a permit, issued by a competent authority, as well as with a certificate of identity.

and article 23 defines prisoners of war as "lawful and disarmed enemies."

The Oxford Manual of the Laws of War on Land of 1880 gave to such persons a more lenient treatment, as is shown in article 22:

Persons who follow an army without forming a part of it, such as correspondents of newspapers, sutlers, contractors, etc., on falling into the power of the enemy, can only be detained for so long a time as may be required by military necessity.

The rules of the Hague Convention of 1899 do not define prisoners of war, but do provide for their treatment, and provide that newspaper correspondents and reporters shall have like treatment when captured.

Certification of newspaper correspondents. The implication of the last clause of Article XIII, viz, "provided they (newspaper correspondents, etc.) can produce a certificate from the military authorities of the army they were accompanying," is that in the future such correspondents are to be regularly certified by the commander of the forces with which they for the time being are.

According to the Hague Convention, the right to grant certificates to correspondents is in the hands of the commander. The commander, in the absence of orders to the contrary, would be authorized to prescribe the regulations under which certificates would be granted and by implication would be able to exclude from the field of his authority those not properly certified.

Further, there is implied in the right to grant the certificate the right to withhold, which would be a means by which the character of the correspondents could be in a measure controlled.

There would also be implied the right to make such rules for the government of correspondents as might at the time seem good.

The rule of the Hague Convention would also seem to indicate that persons not having a proper certificate would not necessarily be entitled to the treatment of a prisoner of war. If this be the case, the military commander would properly insist that correspondents should, if with the forces, be provided with proper certificates.

A plan making a certificate a compulsory prerequisite for accompanying military forces would accord with the spirit of the Hague Convention, and would put the control of correspondents in the hands of the commander of the forces.

The rules of the Hague Convention were drawn with reference to warfare upon land, and have been accepted - by practically all the states of the world. The United States authorities would, therefore, be fully justified in demanding that those correspondents only should be allowed with its army who were properly certified.

If it is generally accepted that the military authorities of forces on land should control correspondents, it is even more important that such control should be extended to correspondents in the neighborhood of naval operations, for the disclosure of movements of a fleet or of a war vessel may be even more serious than a similar disclosure in regard to forces upon land.

Right-minded newspaper men ask for fair treatment only and would regard regulations which would give equality of opportunity to all correspondents as in every way desirable; otherwise they would not be fit persons to accompany a military force on sea or land.

The control should not, of course, be limited to the correspondents and reporters alone, but should be extended to the whole personnel and all agencies concerned in gathering and forwarding news of the war.

Such control of the personnel and agencies for gathering and forwarding news could be justly demanded, even the Red Cross personnel and agencies must submit to control of the commanding military authority.

The naval commander has a right to control hospital ships according to the Hague Convention, 1899, for the

GENERAL GROUNDS OF CONTROL.

111

Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention, which provide that hospital shipsmust not in any way hamper the movements of the combatants. During and after an engagement they will act at their own risk and peril. The belligerents will have the right to control and visit them; they can refuse to help them, order them off, make them take a certain course, and put a commissioner on board; they can even detain them if important circumstances require it.

As far as possible, the belligerents shall inscribe in the sailing papers of the hospital ships the orders they give them.

The naval commander has full right to demand equal control of correspondents, press boats, dispatch boats, and the like, whose mission may be from its nature far more dangerous than the mission of hospital ships to the success of the military plans.

Regulations somewhat similar in spirit to those for the government of hospital ships and personnel would give to the commander sufficient control without unduly limiting the freedom of action of press boats and press correspondents.

It is on its face far more necessary for a state that its commanders should be unhampered in the prosecution of their military operations in order that they may bring them to a successful issue than that the people of a state should know from hour to hour exactly what the military force is doing. This is what the enemy desires particularly to know.

War is not ordinarily undertaken to give an opportunity for the display of journalistic enterprise, and no commander would be justified in unnecessarily sacrificing resources or men to such enterprise. This being axiomatic, it may also be said that the people are entitled to such knowledge of the course of the war as may not interfere with military operations. The commanding officer in a given area is the best judge as to what information shall be published.

This natural conclusion leads to the further one that the commanding officer must control the news sent from the field of operations. This can be done by the common means of censorship of dispatches and news. This censorship may extend to the entire prohibition of the send

ing of any dispatches or to the determination of what shall be sent and of the form in which it shall be sent.

From what has been said, it is evident that newspaper correspondents, though using wireless telegraphy, are not therefore spies. If guilty of acts of spying, then they are of course liable to the consequences. The simple sending of messages in regard to the war does not in itself constitute spying. It is an act commercial rather than military in its nature.

After newspaper correspondents have been forbidden within a given area or after they have been notified not to communicate any news in regard to military affairs, the sending of dispatches would constitute an offense with which the commanding officer would have full power to deal.

Conclusion. Without previous notice in regard to or regulation of the agencies by which newspaper correspondents may send news, it is presumed that all agencies which may not involve perfidy are legitimate. As the correspondents in this instance had not disobeyed any regulation, but had merely, as would be expected, used the most modern means of communication, they are not therefore liable to any penalty. It would be presumed that the agency of the wireless telegraph would be open. to them in absence of prohibition and unless forbidden no authorization would be necessary.

The correspondents would therefore be acting in a proper manner and would not be liable to any penalty for the use of the agency of the wireless telegraph when such use is not prohibited.

This conclusion shows the emphatic necessity of the regulation of news gathering and transmission on and from the field of military operations.

(b) Granting that newspaper correspondents will be allowed in the field of operations, what regulations should govern them?

Japanese regulations, 1904. The Regulations for War Correspondents issued by the Japanese Government to hold during the Russo-Japanese war accord with the principles set forth above. These regulations are as following:

JAPANESE REGULATIONS, 1904.

113

REGULATIONS FOR WAR CORRESPONDENTS.

ARTICLE 1. Newspaper correspondents who wish to follow the army are required to make application to the department of war, together with a sketch of their antecedents and a document of personal guaranty signed by the proprietor of the newspaper to which they belong.

In case of foreign correspondents, their application shall be sent through their respective ministers or consuls and the department of foreign affairs. Foreign correspondents need only mention in their application the name of the newspaper to which they belong and dispense altogether with the presentation of sketches of antecedents and papers of personal guaranty. ART. 2. The applicant must have been engaged in journalistic work for not less than a year as a member of a newspaper staff.

ART. 3. Foreign correspondents who can not understand the Japanese language may take with them one interpreter each into the field.

Any correspondent requiring an interpreter may engage one himself and present an application on the interpreter's behalf, accompanied by a paper of personal guaranty for the same.

ART. 4. A foreign correspondent, in addition to his interpreter, may engage one or more servants when circumstances demand it, the procedure of engagement to be in accordance with the foregoing article.

ART. 5. The authorities, when they consider it necessary, may cause the selection of one person to act as joint correspondent for several newspapers. ART. 6. In case any person is allowed to accompany the Japanese forces an official permit shall be given him.

ART. 7. The applicants allowed as stated shall be attached to a "kōtō shireibu" (higher commanding officer).

ART. 8. Correspondents shall always wear foreign clothes, and to their left arms shall be attached a white band, measuring about 2 inches in width, on which the name of the newspaper offices which they represent shall be written in Japanese with red ink.

ART. 9. Correspondents shall always carry with them the official permit, and shall, when asked, show it to officers and officials belonging to the Japanese forces.

ART. 10. Correspondents shall always observe the rules and orders to be issued by the kōtō shireibu so long as they remain with the Japanese forces. In case they disregard the above rules and orders, the authorities of the kōtō shireibu may refuse to allow them to accompany the Japanese forces.

ART. 11. The war correspondent will not be allowed to dispatch his communications (whether they be correspondence for publication or private letters or telegrams, etc.) until after their examination by the officer appointed for the purpose by the higher commanding officer. No communication containing cipher or symbols will be permitted to be dispatched. ART. 12. The army and its officers will accord, as far as circumstances permit, to the war correspondent suitable treatment and facilities, and, when in the field and in case of necessity, give him food, etc., or, at his request, give him transportation in vessels or vehicles.

18239-05-8