okay, just need a couple of things clarified before I vote:
1) Militants are prohibited from interacting with war correspondents with the intent of stymieing their actions, inclusive of confiscating their equipment without justification, wounding the individual, or executing them without adequate reasoning. Should a militant fail to comply, both the individual, and the host member-state of the individual shall be held accountable.
(This part doesn't really need clarification; after reading the comments made by earlier contributors, I'm seeing this as avoiding, or at least reducing, a major problem before it appears.)
3) Third parties must inform individuals about the contingent hazards of the occupation prior to their deployment; these private mechanisms are encouraged to compensate war correspondents in proportion to volatility of the region - war correspondents must be notified of their salary prior to their departure. Should the individual change their mind, they may not be subject to any form of punishment.
Define "third party".
4) Individual member-states may deny war correspondents access to their territory, and as such, war correspondents must adhere to standard immigration policies prior to entering; war correspondents that enter without proper verification are exempt from all protection granted by the provisions of this resolution.
Okay, can you tell me why this clause is in here?
5) War correspondents may aid any belligerent during conflict; by doing so, their protection will be nullified until post-conflict, exclusive of self-defense.
So I'm guessing they can aid any innocents, right? What would happen if a belligerent gives the
impression of being an innocent? Is that one a debatable?
If you could please answer, that would be greatly appreciated.
Horgen Dush
Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus