Child Rights Caucus: Morning briefing on Arbitrary Detention

Summary: Last Child Rights Caucus morning briefing with the Chairperson of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Ms Zerrougui.

French

28 March 2007, Many children in detention simply for being ‘alone’ says Ms. Zerrougui, Chairperson of the working group on arbitrary detention

Speaking at the caucus morning briefing she said she was interested to focus on specific issues, such as children in detention, however, over the last six years, only two complaints concerning children in detention had been received by the working group.

The main focus of her mandate is to examine the legality of detention by focusing on three categories:

  • Persons deprived of liberty without legal basis
  • Detention because a person exercised his or her rights (e.g. freedom of religion, expression, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, race, etc.)
  • Grave violations of the right to a fair trial

She said one of the biggest issues is that “the poorest are in detention.” She said, “If you want to change the situation, [you must realise] people are there not because they are the most dangerous but because they are the poorest.”

“Sometimes children there not in detention because they committed a crime, but because they don’t have any family that wants them. They are orphans put in ‘protected
detention’ which is just like prison”, she continued.

In terms of cooperation with NGOs and others, she said UNICEF was the most cooperative specialised institution in helping the WG get information. She said many organisations were worried to provide information to the WG in fear they will face problems with the government. She said that in their public statements the group takes this into consideration and ensures they don’t “undermine the situation of the victims”.

NGOs can be instrumental in identifying where the problems are and advising the working group (WG) on what countries should be visited. She said NGOs can support the WG by bringing individual cases to their attention and the NGO can remain an anonymous source, unless otherwise requested.

The different mechanisms for responding to complaints include: 

  •  Urgent appeal procedure: the group receives urgent appeals about individuals, then sends notices to governments asking for information
  • Deliberation and Legal opinion: these are tools used to address issues never addressed in the past (i.e. Guantanamo Bay and the International Tribunal for Rwanda)

In responding to questions from participants, she said that the WG was able to respond to urgent appeals very quickly as they have direct contact with foreign ministries, however, with the reform of Special Procedures, some states are pushing for appeals to first go through the country’s missions in Geneva. Last year there was only a 34 percent compliance with the appeals.

When asked to give an example of some of the “good places,” she said Canada, Turkey, and Norway were some of the countries she had visited that demonstrated good practice. In Canada, she didn’t find any children in detention. In Turkey, there is a new programme in place, though not fully implemented, that provided for specially trained police and prosecutors to deal with children. Also, there are separate detention centres for children, and they were never found among adults. She will be visiting Norway later this year where she said good practices exist and that she will use this country to show that “it is possible to do things better.”

Further information:

 

Owner: Subgroup for the Human Rights Council

Countries

    Please note that these reports are hosted by CRIN as a resource for Child Rights campaigners, researchers and other interested parties. Unless otherwise stated, they are not the work of CRIN and their inclusion in our database does not necessarily signify endorsement or agreement with their content by CRIN.