Thank you very much, Can. I think it is a very good question that you had and an important issue that you raise. Coming from Pakistan, I have a lot to say on this subject because, obviously, as a human rights defender and a human rights lawyer, I have to deal with individual cases as well as the whole broader concept of safety for journalists in a country that is now declared as one of the most dangerous for journalists and for media to have freedom.

Journalists have been killed, abducted, taken hostage, subjected to torture in forced disappearances, and put under surveillance. They have been attacked in their homes and in their places of work. Their rights have been violated, and confidentiality of their sources has been jeopardized, and their communication devices confiscated or destroyed. Now, these are many issues that have led to a situation that is extremely threatening for journalists and the work that they do.

The threat of harm to these journalists has risen to such a level in certain situations that many journalists are either forced to submit and resort to self-censorship or to flee their countries and live in exile. Both within the country where they work and when they are able to leave, when the threat level has risen to an extent where they cannot survive in that particular environment, we need to institute initiatives at the international level so that we can give refuge to these journalists.

I think it is also important to understand that safety of journalists and their freedom of expression is imperiled, not just by the state, but also by non-state actors such as organized gangs, terrorist organizations, militant groups with extremist ideologies, and other negative elements in the society. This whole question of protection of journalists and safety of journalists has to be a very comprehensive one and a broad framework needs to be adopted.

There are two or three points that I want to make in addition to this. It is very important for somebody either at the non-state level or at the level of intergovernmental engagements to understand who are the journalists who are mostly at risk. Obviously, those are the journalists who report on politics, corruption, organized crimes, et cetera—the journalists who are covering war zones, areas of internal land conflict or civil strife, foreign journalists reporting on international affairs and respect for human rights in countries where authoritarian regimes and poor rule of law observance are there. Local journalists who work in remote areas are more vulnerable because of their relative invisibility, particularly those who report on violations of social and economic rights of rural communities by the state or by powerful national and multinational corporations.

In addition to all the risks that journalists faced, we have to look at the situation of women journalists today. They face gender-specific safety risks, such as sexual harassment. Especially with this digital space, the threat to women journalists has risen to an extent where we really need to become much more sensitive.

I, therefore, think that an essential aspect of the duty to protect is compliance with international norms, human rights, and humanitarian law that are relevant to protection of journalists. What you have just said is very much linked to what I am saying because cooperation with international initiatives established for journalist safety is very important. If we are to establish a media freedom coalition, then an essential part of their thinking has to be concentrated on how to protect these journalists, either in their national environments or even when they are living abroad, and what kind of dignified existence they can have, which allows them to continue with their work as journalists and at the same time protects them.