Submitted by crinadmin on
Summary: Summary of the Second Meeting of the Working Group on an optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child to provide a communications procedure that took place in Geneva from December 6 to December 10, 2010.
Articles 15 – 23. Click here to see the draft text of these Articles. Poland began the discussions on standard provisions by affirming Article 18’s stipulation that the Optional Protocol enter into force three months after the tenth State party ratification. Finland agreed, accepting all standard provisions as drafted and, along with Slovenia, expressed strong support for Article 19’s ban on reservations to the Optional Protocol. New Zealand, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Algeria, Mexico and the United States, however, voiced their disagreement and preferred to allow reservations so long as they would not be incompatible with the object and purpose of the convention. New Zealand wanted to ensure that States parties to the Optional Protocol would make information about the communications procedure available under Article 16 in a format accessible to children with disabilities in line with obligations under the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Australia, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Slovenia and Brazil agreed that information would need to be child-friendly and universally accessible, and Belgium felt information should be made available to any person who might have an interest in bringing a communication under the Optional Protocol. France thought that provisions on dissemination of information should be aimed both at the public in general and at children specifically, while Denmark wondered how the views of the Committee would be disseminated to children. Turning to the last of the standard provisions, Slovenia then wondered whether when the Secretary General informed States of ratifications to the Protocol under Article 22, he should also mention if the ratifying State had chosen to “opt out” of any of the provisions. As NGOs took the floor, the European Disability Forum echoed States’ calls to make the Optional Protocol accessible to children with disabilities, and - recognizing the standards in the Disabilities Convention – called for materials to be made available in sign language. The NGO Group for a CRC Complaints Mechanism, International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), and Committee on the Rights of the Child agreed, while independent expert Peter Newell reminded States that the obligation to make information accessible would rest with them as the Article was currently drafted. The NGO Group, ICJ, and Jean Zermatten, Vice Chair of the Committee, also welcomed the prohibition on reservations under Article 19 as any reservations to a procedural or quasi-judicial Optional Protocol would necessarily be incompatible with that Protocol. To conclude the session, the Chairperson then reviewed proposals to make information about the Optional Protocol more accessible and child-friendly under Article 16, and – given the wide support received – suggested language to be added to the draft to that effect. With respect to Article 19’s prohibition on reservations, however, he called for further thought and discussion before reaching a final decision.