This investigation reveals the fate of Iraqi journalists who were injured during battles against ISIS and lost their right to compensation and medical treatment due to gaps in employment contracts, insurance, compensation, and oversight—even though the injured and the families of those killed have continued to pursue their rights years after the fighting ended.
In 2017, a camera from the “Salah al-Din” channel captured the final moments of its correspondent, Harb Hazza, after he and a media team were trapped while covering the battles in the village of Imam Gharbi, south of Mosul, between ISIS and Iraqi security forces. In the footage, Harb is seen reciting the “two testimonies of faith” before he died, alongside his colleague Su’ad Fares, while others on the team were wounded.
In a documentary aired by the channel later, it was confirmed that Harb was carrying out an assignment to cover the fighting.
Nine years later, his family says they have received neither compensation from the channel nor the government compensation they sought after his death.
His wife explains that the state paid him a retirement pension in his capacity as a civil servant in addition to his work as a journalist, but did not classify him as a victim of terrorism, despite the documents and testimonies submitted by the family. This classification would have allowed the family to receive compensation related to his death while performing his duties.
His wife explains that the state paid him a pension as a civil servant in addition to his work as a journalist, but did not classify him as a victim of terrorism, despite the documents and testimonies submitted by the family. This classification would have allowed the family to receive compensation related to his death while performing his duties.
Also on the same team was Mustafa al-Wahadi, a correspondent for the “Samarra” satellite channel, who was injured by shrapnel in his leg and other parts of his body. His medical reports document that his disability rating reached 50 percent.
He reports that the channel provided him with no assistance during the first months following his injury, did not cover his medical expenses, and then suspended his salary on the pretext that he worked as a “freelance correspondent” and was no longer able to work. After making a partial recovery, he returned to the channel, only to have his employment terminated months later under the pretext of budget cuts. The channel was subsequently shut down, and its employees were laid off.
Nine years after his injury, Mustafa continues to pursue government agencies in search of compensation he has not yet received, amid a process he describes as lengthy and complicated.
The war and Mustafa’s case are part of a broader narrative that unfolded during the years of the war against ISIS.
Between 2014 and 2017, as military operations to retake Iraqi cities intensified, dozens of journalists and photographers worked in combat zones and on the front lines. The cases being investigated by Al-Taqiya show that many of them worked in extremely dangerous environments without documented employment contracts or clear guarantees of medical treatment, insurance, or compensation in the event of injury.
According to a report prepared by the “Association for the Defense of Press Freedom” to document casualties during the battles to retake cities from ISIS, 40 journalists were killed and 76 others were injured, including 30 who sustained life-threatening injuries.
The facts reveal a systemic flaw that extends beyond the employment relationship to the aftermath of an injury: journalists worked without formal contracts, and some contractual documents lacked clear guarantees regarding work-related injuries and insurance. Furthermore, treatment was halted before it was completed, and rights guaranteed by law were bogged down in lengthy administrative procedures, at a time when the Ministry of Labor suspended the inspection committees responsible for monitoring the enforcement of labor and social security laws.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi Journalists’ Union received a government allocation of billions of dinars for medical treatment and mutual aid, yet injured journalists and the families of journalists who were killed or died as a result of their injuries stated that they were unaware of this allocation, and the union did not contact them to help them access it.
An Injury That Ended Work Behind the Camera
In 2015, during the height of the battles to retake the “Al-Bu’ajil” area in Salah al-Din Governorate, a vehicle carrying a news crew from the “Baladi” satellite channel accidentally crossed the front lines, finding itself in the crosshairs of ISIS fire. Cameraman Ammar Ja’far was inside the vehicle. He describes what happened, saying the team found itself in “enemy territory, and we had no weapons other than our journalistic equipment.”
The reporter was hit first, then a bullet pierced Ammar’s hand, causing partial paralysis that left him unable to hold the camera as he had before. He later sustained another head injury while covering the battles in Mosul.
The management of Baladi TV, which was then owned by former Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, covered the cost of one surgery for Ammar in Iran. However, he reports that his rehabilitation treatment was not completed, and he was asked to return to work.
In 2021, the channel closed its doors permanently, leaving Ammar unemployed without financial compensation, end-of-service benefits, or even health insurance to cover the effects of his injury. He was later forced to work as a security guard on a temporary contract, earning no more than $200 a month, according to his statement.
When the camera beat the question about the wounded man
War correspondent “Ali Jawad” has been covering military operations against ISIS since 2013 and has been wounded twice, the most serious of which occurred in 2016 when his team was targeted by a heat-seeking missile. The cameraman accompanying him was killed, and Ali suffered shrapnel wounds and a ruptured eardrum.
According to his account, he received treatment twice at Al-Kafeel Hospital in Karbala, rather than through the media organization he was working for. Ali illustrates how some organizations treat field journalists by recounting an incident he witnessed involving a reporter who was injured in an IED explosion in Tikrit.
The journalist was bleeding as he lay on an ambulance stretcher when an official from the TV station called to ask about the camera—whether it had been damaged—without first inquiring about the injured journalist’s condition.
Ali believes that his colleagues’ experiences reveal a reality in which injured journalists bear the costs of their own treatment, while some forms of official and union recognition have been limited to medals or modest sums that, in his view, are disproportionate to the injuries and their long-term effects.
Seven Journalists… Seven Paths of What Happened After the Injury
The effects of the irregularities traced by the investigation are not evident in the texts and contracts alone. The investigator documented the cases of seven other journalists who were injured while covering battles; their paths then diverged, ranging from interrupted treatment, permanent disability, and dismissal from work to years of legal proceedings in pursuit of compensation. Click on each journalist’s photo to read their story and view the related documents:
A Clear Flaw in the Hiring Process
One of the problems revealed by the investigation begins even before reaching the battlefields. Article 13 of the Iraqi Journalists’ Rights Law requires media outlets to enter into employment contracts with journalists, based on a template prepared by the Journalists’ Union, and mandates that media organizations file a copy of the contract with the union.
However, Ibrahim al-Sarraj, president of the “Iraqi Association for the Defense of Journalists’ Rights,” describes the provision as “still just ink on paper” and estimates that about 80 percent of those working in the media sector do so without formal contracts. This percentage remains an estimate issued by the association and is not a comprehensive government statistic.
The testimonies of injured journalists interviewed for this investigation corroborate this reality; the majority of documented cases involved workers who were employed without contracts covering the period of their injury. However, the existence of a contract does not necessarily guarantee adequate protection.
The investigator reviewed four samples of media employment documents and contracts and presented them to legal experts to examine the protections they provide to journalists, particularly regarding work-related injuries, insurance, financial rights, and dispute resolution.
Attorney Muhammad al-Rubaie, president of the “Al-Nahrain Foundation for Transparency,” found in the templates he reviewed loopholes of varying degrees, including the failure to file or have them certified by the Journalists’ Union in accordance with the approved template, the presence of a confidentiality clause in some documents, and the absence of clear mechanisms in several of them for resolving disputes or providing compensation for work-related injuries, as well as health and social insurance.
Al-Rubaie also noted that some templates do not clearly outline all the benefits mandated by Iraqi Labor Law No. 37 of 2015, including end-of-service benefits.
Karawan Majid, a lawyer specializing in media law, examined the same templates from a different angle: What does the document guarantee for the media organization, and what does it guarantee for the journalist when it comes to pay, injury, termination of employment, or disputes?
This investigation presents the key findings from his analysis of each template.
Contracts Under the Microscope:
These conclusions represent attorney Karwan Majid’s interpretation of the documents we presented to him and do not constitute a legal ruling on their legality.
However, as documented by the investigation, the problem is not limited to the terms contained in the contracts.
Journalists told the investigation that some organizations require them to sign copies of the contracts and return them, but do not provide a copy signed by the organization itself, which can complicate a journalist’s ability to prove the contractual relationship should a dispute arise regarding pay, termination, or injury.
Legal expert Ali al-Tamimi, after reviewing sample journalism and media employment contracts, believes that some practices come close to the concept of “contracts of submission,” because the organization unilaterally sets the terms and penalty clauses with limited room for negotiation.
Al-Tamimi attributes this to the scarcity of job opportunities and high unemployment rates within the media sector, which leaves journalists with no choice but to accept the terms offered or lose their livelihood.
He also points out that some contracts include clauses prohibiting journalists from working with other media organizations for specific periods, thereby restricting their ability to seek alternative sources of income—all while the employer may fail to provide health or insurance benefits commensurate with the risks of the job.
Proven Injury… and Difficulty Accessing Benefits
Article 11 of the Iraqi Journalists’ Rights Law stipulates that an injured journalist who is not a government employee shall be granted a retirement pension of 500,000 dinars (approximately $334), if their disability rate reaches 50 percent, and 250,000 dinars if the disability rate is 30 percent or higher. However, the cases investigated by Al-Tahqeeq reveal that accessing this right involves medical reviews and committees, as well as procedures to prove the degree of disability and the nature of the injury. Mustafa Al-Wahadi’s case clearly highlights this gap.
His medical reports document a 50 percent disability rate—the threshold at which, by law, an injured person covered by the law is entitled to a retirement pension. Nevertheless, according to his statement, he is still going through the government channels to obtain compensation, nine years after his injury.
Ministry of Labor: The Journalist Must File a Complaint
The investigation referred questions to the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs regarding the continued employment of journalists without formal contracts or insurance coverage.
Najm al-Aqabi, head of the ministry’s Media Committee, stated that the law guarantees journalists’ coverage under social security, and that an affected journalist may file a formal complaint with the ministry or appeal to the competent labor court.
However, the ministry’s response also revealed that one of the oversight mechanisms—which was supposed to detect violations within organizations before workers reached the stage of filing a complaint—had ceased to function.
According to Al-Aqabi, inspection committees used to conduct periodic—and sometimes daily—visits to organizations to monitor compliance with labor and social security laws, and they helped bring approximately 400,000 workers from various sectors under the social security umbrella. However, the Social Security Department suspended the work of these committees by official decree.
As a result, uncovering violations has become more dependent on the worker taking the initiative to file a complaint. This process becomes even more difficult when a journalist works without a documented contract or does not possess a signed copy proving the nature of their relationship with the employer.
Five Billion Dinars for Medical Care and Solidarity
On January 2, 2024, the Iraqi Council of Ministers allocated five billion dinars (approximately $3.7 million) to the Iraqi Journalists’ Union. The allocation covered medical expenses for elderly, sick, and veteran journalists, as well as support for social solidarity programs, in addition to medical care and social solidarity benefits for the families of more than 500 martyred journalists, according to the announcement. The union welcomed the decision at the time.
However, injured journalists and the families of killed and deceased journalists—who were included in the investigation—said the union did not contact them to inform them of the possibility of benefiting from these funds; among them were the family of Harb Hazza in Salah al-Din and the family of photojournalist Omar Muhammad, who died from his injuries.
On July 12, 2026, the union published a list of 50 journalists eligible for grant funds and invited them to review it.
We reviewed the list and did not find the names of any of the injured journalists we had interviewed while conducting our investigation; however, it did include the names of journalists working at the union and former members of its board of directors.
The mere presence of these names is not sufficient to prove any irregularities in the distribution of funds; we do not have complete information about the health status of all those included or the criteria the union used to select them.
However, the absence of the injured journalists whose cases were documented by the investigation—and the fact that they were largely unaware of the grant’s existence—raises questions about the mechanism for identifying beneficiaries, the selection criteria, and how to reach injured journalists and the families of those killed or deceased, who are supposed to be covered by the medical treatment and mutual aid program.
A Grant for Treatment… and Injured Journalists Left Out
After the investigator informed a number of injured journalists about the grant, three of them went to the Journalists’ Syndicate carrying medical records and documents related to their injuries and their ongoing effects. According to their accounts, the union asked them to submit a series of documents and reviews, along with recent medical reports, before reviewing their files and deciding whether to include them in the program.
This process sent the three journalists back into the government bureaucracy for years as they tried to prove their injuries and secure their rights, so they decided not to continue with the process, according to their account.
Their experience raises a question that goes beyond the mere existence of funds to the mechanism for accessing them: Is it the responsibility of the injured person to learn of the grant’s existence and begin a new process to prove their condition, or should the entity managing treatment and solidarity funds have a mechanism to identify known cases and determine their needs?
We sent questions to the Journalists’ Syndicate regarding the criteria for selecting beneficiaries, the mechanism for identifying injured journalists and the families of those killed, and the reasons why the funds did not reach the cases documented by the investigation, in addition to questions about its role in employment contracts and the protection of injured journalists.
The investigator also contacted three members of the union’s board of directors and sent the questions to the union’s official email address and to board members. Despite repeated and documented promises to respond, no reply had been received from the union as of the date of publication.
Shared Responsibilities… and the Injured Bear the Burden
The cases and documents tracked by the investigation reveal a protection system in which responsibilities are distributed among multiple parties: the media organization defines the employment relationship and assigns the assignment to the journalist, while the “Journalists’ Rights Law” requires media outlets to enter into contracts and grants specific benefits to injured journalists.
The Ministry of Labor is responsible for monitoring the enforcement of labor and social security laws, but its inspection committees—which used to visit organizations and monitor violations—have ceased operations.
As for the Journalists’ Union, the law grants it a role in regulating contracts, and it has received a government allocation of billions of dinars for medical treatment and mutual aid.
However, the cases documented by the investigation reveal the absence of a clear protection framework for journalists—one that begins with a documented employment contract before they head out into the field and ends with medical treatment and compensation in the event of injury.
Nine years ago, “Harb Hazza” and “Mustafa al-Wahadi” were part of the same media team covering the same battle. Harb’s mission ended on the battlefield. According to his wife, his family still lives without the compensation she has sought since his death while performing his journalistic duties.
As for Mustafa, he survived but with shrapnel in his body and a documented 50 percent disability rating. The channel stopped paying his salary after his injury, then terminated his employment, and to this day he continues to pursue government agencies in search of benefits he has yet to receive.
Between the fate of the journalist who was killed and that of his colleague who survived with injuries, the investigation highlights a series of systemic failures: a precarious employment relationship, inadequate medical care, legal entitlements that are difficult to access, waning government oversight, and funds for treatment and mutual aid that some of the injured—whose cases were documented by the investigation—were unaware even existed.
The conflict they had been covering for years has ended, but its cost remains divided between a family that lost its breadwinner and a journalist who bears the scars of his injury. The cases documented by the investigation reveal the absence of a clear institutional framework that protects journalists from the moment they are assigned a task and continues to support them in the event of injury or after their death.
Responses from Media Organizations
The investigator contacted all media organizations named in the investigation—either through their official addresses or via representatives of their management—and sent them detailed questions regarding the testimonies and facts attributed to them, thereby ensuring their right to respond.
We did not receive any response from these organizations as of the date of this investigation’s publication, with the exception of a response from Al-Hurra TV regarding photographer Maytham Radif, and from Al-Ghadir TV, which sent a response regarding the cases of Ahmed Al-Badiri and Murtaza Al-Mousawi.
* This investigation was conducted with support from ARIJ and in partnership with “Abeer.”
