CRINmail 1403
In this issue:
View this CRINmail online.
Realising the Promises of the CRC:
A Modern Approach to Transparency and Accountability
Is there a simple way for advocates, governments and researchers to determine whether child-related policies worldwide adhere to the provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)? The question is especially pertinent as we near the 25th anniversary of the CRC. Accordingly, this week's CRINmail starts with a look at how a monitoring mechanism that allows for comparative analysis of national policies can fill critical information gaps.
In this week’s edition we welcome our guest editors Amy Raub, Aleta Sprague and Jody Heymann from the World Policy Analysis Center at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health. As part of their research, they ask what tools have governments and policymakers used to translate international agreements into national action? Where have we seen progress and where do gaps persist? What would a 21st century approach to increased transparency and accountability look like? Several of the areas addressed include children's right to education, child labour and child marriage.
Introduction
A modernised monitoring mechanism that permits straightforward comparison of child rights policies across countries and over time could hold the answers to all three of the questions above. While the current CRC monitoring system collects valuable, in-depth information about countries’ progress every five years, a complementary monitoring system that provides directly comparable, up-to-date data on countries’ actions—and harnesses new technologies to make this information readily accessible and easy-to-understand—could significantly strengthen the CRC’s impact.
The WORLD Policy Analysis Center has developed a comprehensive quantitative data set examining over 1000 indicators on social, economic, educational, and health laws and policies in all 193 UN Member States. As the CRC’s 25th anniversary approaches, we use this database of national actions to evaluate progress through 2014 toward embedding the CRC’s principles in national laws and policies—and identify critical gaps that remain. The results of this effort reveal how quantitative data could successfully supplement traditional monitoring efforts by providing current, comparable information on countries’ policies relating to rights.
Free interactive maps, factsheets, infographics, and public use data are now available at: worldpolicyforum.org. We hope this will be a valuable tool to civil society, policymakers, and researchers seeking to improve children’s lives around the world. To further demonstrate both the feasibility and merit of this approach to accountability, below we highlight key findings from these data in the areas of education, child labour, and child marriage.
Right to Education
Article 28 of the CRC ensures children’s right to education. The majority of countries (90 percent) that have ratified the CRC have made primary school free and compulsory, facilitating nearly universal primary enrolment and gender parity in most regions. However, many States parties impose barriers to students completing their education: 14 percent charge tuition fees in the first year of secondary school, while 24 percent do so before the end of secondary school. Gender gaps in secondary enrolment rates persist in many regions. But can countries afford to do better? The short answer is yes: at least a third of the countries that charge tuition fees in secondary school spend less than 4 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on education—firmly below the global average. Despite their CRC commitments, these countries are not investing enough in their children’s education.
Child Labour
Article 32 of the CRC declares that children should be protected from hazardous work. Yet according to the International Labour Organization, over half of the world’s 168 million child labourers work in dangerous conditions that jeopardize their health and safety. One reason is that 26 percent of States parties permit children under 18 to engage in hazardous work. Moreover, once legal exceptions that allow children to work at younger ages are considered, only 53 percent of States parties legally protect children from hazardous work in all circumstances. Implementation is essential, but a necessary first step to protecting child labourers is eliminating exceptions that legalise the employment of children in dangerous settings.
Child Marriage
While the CRC does not explicitly address child marriage, multiple articles address the harmful consequences associated with the practice. The CRC also protects children from discrimination based on gender. While 88 percent of States parties have set a minimum age of marriage for girls at 18 years or older, most countries create exceptions for parental consent or under customary or religious law. Accounting for these exceptions, 15 percent of States parties legally allow girls as young as 13 years old to be married and 30 percent legally allow girls to be married at 15. In 32 percent of countries there is a gender disparity in the minimum age of marriage with parental consent. To ensure equal opportunities for girls, States parties must remove exceptions to minimum age laws and guarantee girls equivalent legal protection as boys.
Realising the CRC’s Promise
These are but a few examples of the types of data and comparative global analyses that can emerge from a complementary monitoring system derived from already available sources: countries’ laws, constitutions, and public policies. To accelerate change to fully protect the world’s children, we need to utilise technology to provide actionable real-time information on issues such as these. Everyone should have access to information on their country’s policies via their cell phone and the internet. Policymakers should have the tools they need to make informed policy decisions and be held accountable for their actions. Civil society should know which countries are leaders and which are lagging behind in order to target advocacy efforts. Researchers should have access to quantitatively comparable data that allow them to rigorously analyse the effectiveness of individual policies in improving outcomes.
At worldpolicyforum.org, we demonstrate that these ideas are feasible. As a next step, existing national surveys could be used to monitor global implementation of the CRC, supplemented with direct input about the nature and extent of implementation of these policies from children and their families using interactive technologies. The global community has made important progress toward fulfilling the promises of the CRC over the past 25 years, though significant challenges remain. To ensure that the full scope of children’s rights is respected worldwide, we will need to use new tools and engage governments and civil society around the globe. The future of millions of children depends on how fast the world acts.
Back to top
LATEST NEWS AND REPORTS
San Marino bans corporal punishment of children
San Marino has become the latest State to ban all forms of corporal punishment of children in all settings, including the home. Following legal amendments in September, the Family Law Reform now recognises children’s right to protection and security, including against “corporal punishment or other treatment harmful to their physical and psychological integrity. The Penal Code now also defines as a criminal abuse of power the use of corporal punishment in the name of discipline. There are now 42 States which have banned corporal punishment of children in all settings.
Further Information:
Children killed in multiple school bombings
In Nigeria, a suicide bomber dressed as a school student killed at least 47 people, most of them students, during assembly at an all-boys school. The attack occurred in the northeastern town of Potiskum in Yobe State, a territory close to the stronghold of the Islamic militant group Boko Haram. The attack follows government claims in mid-October that a cease-fire had been agreed with the armed group, despite its leader denying the allegation. However, no group has claimed responsibility for the latest attack.
At least 24 children died in Syria after their schools were shelled in the second week of November alone. There have been 33 similar incidents so far in 2014, which have killed around 105 children and injured nearly 300. According to the UN, a total of 4,000 schools in Syria have been destroyed in the ongoing civil war or are being used as temporary housing. Advocates say the situation has caused 2.8 million Syrian children to be out of school or at high risk of dropping out. A 2013 report documented how both sides in the conflict are also using schools for military purposes, with government forces found to have fired on school buildings that were not occupied by rebels.
Meanwhile in Ukraine, two children died last week and four others were injured after an artillery shell hit a school sports field in Donetsk. Despite a ceasefire signed on 5 September, which is still in force, hundreds of people have lost their lives in recent weeks.
Protests are increasing in Mexico over the disappearance in September of 43 students at a teacher-training college which has a reputation as a protest leader in Guerrero state. Witnesses say the students, who were planning to hold a protest in the town of Iguala, were arrested by police suspected to be operating in collusion with a local criminal gang. More than 70 people have been arrested in connection with the massacre, including the town’s mayor and his wife for allegedly ordering that the students be arrested. The incident has undermined the government of President Enrique Peña Nieto, who had assured that his security strategy was helping reduce organised crime and violence resulting from the so-called “war on drugs”, which has left more than 100,000 people dead since 2006, including at least 2,000 children. According to Mexico's human rights commission, there are also more than 23,000 people recorded as missing.
For more news on children and armed conflict, read our latest CRINmail on the issue.
Juvenile justice and the media
Advocates in the United Kingdom say courts are increasingly bowing to media pressure in naming child offenders, following a recent case in which a judge allowed the media to name and publicise the image of a teenager convicted of murdering his school teacher. Minutes after the judge lifted the reporting restrictions - which are there to prevent the media from publicising a child defendant’s name, address, school or other particulars which could lead to his or her identification - some media providers freely described the 16-year-old as “evil” and “psychopathic”.
While the judge held that it was in the “public interest” to name the boy, advocates pointed out that the decision risked giving in to “public voyeurism”. “The public may be interested in hearing more details about the perpetrator,” said Frances Crook, head of the Howard League for Penal Reform, “but that is not the same thing as the public interest.” Experts say that naming offenders will make their rehabilitation more difficult, with Penelope Gibbs, chair of the Standing Committee for Youth Justice, saying that “Media interest is not the same as public interest. If we want fewer victims, we need to give anonymity to children who commit crime.” Commenting on how this was a rare case and that “very few children commit serious and violent crimes,” Frances Crook said that “parading them [child offenders] in public fuels the mistaken view that this is more prevalent,” not to mention that it gives rise to exaggerated social fears of children.
Meanwhile the UK Supreme Court is set to decide whether the police can use CCTV images of children to identify those suspected of criminal activity, amid concerns that the practice violates children’s right to private life.
Further Information:
Inter-American Commission rejects Dominican ruling
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has dismissed the decision by the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic, which declared unconstitutional the instrument accepting the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, saying that the “judgment has no basis whatsoever in international law, and therefore it can have no effect.” The Dominican court’s verdict follows the State’s rejection of a judgement delivered by the Inter-American Court in relation to a case brought on behalf of 26 petitioners, including 15 children, alleging that the Dominican Republic is responsible for rights violations produced as a result of discriminatory policies towards and the arbitrary detention and mass expulsion of individuals of Haitian descent.
Meanwhile last week the Inter-American Commission concluded its 153rd Session. There were relatively few hearings specifically addressing children’s rights issues in the Americas compared to previous sessions. Nonetheless, two of the hearings addressed the human rights situation of migrants and refugees in the region, including children. In particular, the Commission expressed concern over the treatment of migrant children and their families arriving in the United States, including with regard to their mass detention and lack of access to legal representation. On this issue, the Commission regretted the State's decision to expand its family detention facilities, despite warnings that States must not detain either accompanied and unaccompanied migrant children. Among its recommendations to the US, the Commission criticised the acceleration of deportation proceedings and urged the State to adopt measures to identify migrants who may qualify as refugees or require special protection, as is the case with families and children fleeing situations of violence in their home countries.
The next IACHR session will take place between 13-27 March 2015. The option to request hearings or working meetings will be available for this session from 18 December 2014 to 6 January 2015.
Practices harmful to women and girls
For the first time, two UN human rights committees joined forces to issue a General Comment outlining States’ obligations in preventing and eliminating harmful practices inflicted on women and girls. These include female genital mutilation, so-called “honour” crimes, forced and child marriage and virginity testing. Among the other issues addressed by the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women are widowhood practices, infanticide, binding and body modifications including fattening, neck elongation and breast ironing. The two committees also address practices such as women and girls undergoing plastic surgery to conform to social norms of beauty.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is inviting submissions on “good practices and major challenges in preventing and eliminating female genital mutilation” (FGM). In particular, views and information would be welcome on:
-
Legislation;
-
Policies and strategies including on education and awareness-raising campaigns;
-
Services for victims of FGM or those who are at risk of FGM;
-
Information on health providers practicing FGM; and
-
Major challenges in preventing and eliminating FGM.
The deadline for submissions is 8 December 2014.
Back to top
ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN IN SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS
Saint Kitts and Nevis has ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, however, it is not considered to be part of national law and cannot be directly enforced in the courts. Children must act through a “next friend” in order to litigate cases in their name, unless the court authorises otherwise. The court is required to ensure that there is no conflict of interest between the child and his next friend. Children may give evidence in court, but only if they are considered to be sufficiently mature. Legal aid is not well organised and pro bono practice of law firms is non-existent.
Read the full report on access to justice for children in Saint Kitts and Nevis.
This report is part of CRIN’s access to justice for children project, looking at the status of the CRC in national law, the status of children involved in legal proceedings, the legal means to challenge violations of children’s rights and the practical considerations involved in challenging violations.
Back to top
UPCOMING EVENTS
Policy: Call for applications for the Chair of the UNCRC Policy Center
Organisation: UNCRC Policy Center
Location: N/A
Children's rights: International conference - 25 Years CRC
Organisation: Leiden University et al.
Date: 17-19 November 2014
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Courts: Children’s rights moot court competition
Organisation: Leiden University
Date: 18-20 November 2014
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Palliative care: 2nd Congress on Paediatric Palliative Care
Organisation: Maruzza Foundation
Date: 19-21 November 2014
Location: Rome, Italy
Education: ‘The relevance of children's rights in a higher education context'
Organisation: Institute of Education, University of London
Date: 19 November 2014
Location: London, United Kingdom
Migrant detention: ‘End Immigration Detention of Children in Asia’ - Call for Film Submissions
Organisation: Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network
Date: 20 November 2014
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Course: Master of Advanced Studies in Children’s Rights
Organisation: University Institute Kurt Bösch
Application deadline: 20 November 2014
Location: Sion, Switzerland
Transnational child protection: The role of judges, social services and central authorities
Organisation: Council of Baltic Sea States
Date: 25 - 26 November 2014
Location: Riga, Latvia
Investment: 'Children First - Better Public Spending for Better Outcomes for Children & Families'
Organisation: Eurochild
Date: 26-28 November 2014
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Children in court: Call for contributions on “Children’s rights judgements” project
Organisation: Universities of Liverpool and Newcastle
Deadline: 30 November 2014
Location: N/A
Juvenile justice: ‘Making deprivation of children’s liberty a last resort - Towards evidence-based policies & alternatives’
Organisation: International Juvenile Justice Observatory
Event date: 3-4 December 2014
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Discrimination: ‘Children’s right to non-discrimination’
Organisation: CREAN - Children’s Rights Erasmus Academic Network
Date: 4-5 December 2014
Location: Vilnius, Lithuania
Best interests: European Conference on the Best Interests of the Child
Organisation: Various
Date: 9-10 December 2014
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Institutionalisation: Call for papers on institutionalised children in South Asia
Organisation: Udayan Care
Submission deadline: 31 December 2014
Location: N/A
Course: Education in Emergencies e-learning course
Organisation: Human Rights Education Associates
Dates: 14 January-24 February 2015
Location: Online
Course: Child Safeguarding e-learning course
Organisation: Human Rights Education Associates
Dates: 14 January-24 February 2015
Location: Online
Juvenile justice: World Congress on Juvenile Justice - Towards restorative justice?
Organisation: Terre des hommes et al.
Date: 26-30 January 2015
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Back to top
EMPLOYMENT
Child Rights Connect: Director
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Application deadline: 13 November 2014
Child Soldiers International: Campaign manager
Application deadline: 16 November 2014
Location: London, United Kingdom
Save the Children Sweden: Experts for Child protection in Emergencies – Ebola response
Application deadline: 16 November 2014
Location: Various
Welsh Government: Children’s Commissioner for Wales
Location: Swansea and Colwyn Bay, Wales, United Kingdom
Application deadline: 21 November 2014
Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children: Evaluation Consultancy
Location: N/A
Application deadline: 23 November 2014
Save the Children Sweden: A Thematic Advisor for Child Protection - West and Central Africa
Location: Dakar, Senegal
Application deadline: 23 November 2014
THE LAST WORD
"The way the media portray children has a profound impact on society’s attitude to children and childhood, which also affects the way adults behave. [...] Journalists need to be aware of the consequences of their reporting. [...] Sensational coverage may distort and exploit a serious problem, doing more harm than good. Some editors claim that sensationalism permits serious social issues to capture the attention of readers and viewers. [...] To examine how this can be changed requires examination of the professional conditions in which media work, a review of the principles or guidelines journalists and programme makers should follow, and the obstacles that stand in the way of good journalism."
-- Aidan White, Director of the Ethical Journalism Network and former General Secretary of the International Federation of Journalists
Back to top
| 
