Submitted by vanessa on
A/HRC/26/29
Download the full text. Below are children's rights extracts.
Marginalised groups, including children: The Special Rapporteur acknowledges that groups most at risk share the experience of discrimination, unequal treatment and harassment. He describes those groups based on their level of marginalisation in the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. Some of the groups that are considered in the present report to be most at risk are persons with disabilities; youth, including children; women; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people; members of minority groups; indigenous peoples; internally displaced persons; and non-nationals, including refugees, asylum seekers and migrant workers. (Paragraph 10)
Restrictions on exercise of the right to peaceful assembly, including age: Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognises that the right to freedom of peaceful assembly should be enjoyed by everyone, as provided for by article 2 of the Covenant and resolutions 15/21, 21/16 and 24/5 of the Human Rights Council. Importantly, in its resolution 24/5, the Council reminded States of their obligation to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, online as well as offline, including in the context of elections, and including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote those rights. Despite this, some Member States have laws that contain explicitly discriminatory provisions prohibiting assemblies by certain groups. (Paragraph 22)
In Malaysia, for example, the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 prohibits people under the age of 21 from organizing a public demonstration. Children under the age of 15 cannot even participate. (Paragraph 23)
Child protestors: In the case of youth, including children, the Special Rapporteur acknowledges that there may be safety concerns when young people participate in some public demonstrations. However, he believes that laws such as that of Malaysia are not tailored narrowly enough to specifically address that concern. Rather, a blanket ban on individuals of a certain age eliminates the right to participate in peaceful public assemblies for an entire portion of the population, without exception, contrary to article 15 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. (Paragraph 24)
Politically excluded groups: The Special Rapporteur also notes that the failure to provide any outlet for politically excluded groups to air their grievances can be counterproductive and carry severe consequences. Further, such restrictions can foster or magnify a culture of silence among the excluded group, putting them at higher risk of violations and abuses that may go unreported, uninvestigated and unpunished. (Paragraph 26)
Restrictions on the right, including “anti-gay propaganda” laws: In some circumstances, general laws governing assemblies may have a disproportionate impact on certain groups who exercise or seek to exercise their assembly rights. Those restrictions appear to be neutral on their face, but in practice, they may have a harsh impact on the assembly rights of certain groups most at risk. They may also be drafted to appear neutral, but in practice are applied only against certain groups. (Paragraph 29)
Some of the most prominent examples include “public morality” laws that have been used selectively against those promoting LGBTI rights. In June 2013, the President of the Russian Federation signed legislation banning “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” among minors. There is no legal definition in the Russian law of what constitutes non-traditional sexual relations, but it is widely acknowledged to be code for homosexual relations. While legislators have argued that the main purpose of the law is to protect children, the Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern at the law and recommended its repeal, as it found that it encouraged the stigmatization and discrimination of LGBTI children and the targeting and persecution of the LGBTI community (CRC/C/RUS/CO/4-5, para. 25). (Paragraph 30)
Children forming or joining associations: Some laws limit the type of associations that individuals or groups can join or form. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has noted with concern that in Costa Rica, the Children and Adolescents Code denied adolescents the right to form or join political associations, yet they may form community development associations in which they may actively participate (CRC/C/CRI/CO/4, para. 37). In Turkey, children over the age of 15 may form associations and from the age of 12 may join those associations, but they must be 19 in order to form an organizational committee for outdoor meetings (CRC/C/TUR/CO/2-3, para. 38). The justification for explicitly excluding those groups from forming associations that engage in certain activities is unclear. (Paragraph 49)
In an example of good practice, the Supreme Court of Estonia found the provisions of the Non-Profit Associations Act that restricted the right to form and lead associations to persons over the age of 18 years old to be in contravention of article 15 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. (Paragraph 50)
Internet restrictions: As stated by the Human Rights Council, in its resolution 24/5, the right to freedom of association applies both online and offline. As such, laws that unjustifiably restrict freedom of expression on the internet and limit the ability of people to associate over that medium are unacceptable. With youth being the most active social media users overall, restrictions placed on access to social media sites will disproportionately affect their ability to organise and mobilise for their common interests. The perception that youth in general lacks maturity and are therefore incapable of participating fully in public affairs often forms the backdrop against which some Governments feel the need to filter and dictate media content made available in their countries. (Paragraph 63)
Disability: The Special Rapporteur recognises the severe impact that the diagnosis of disability can have on the right to freedom of association. Too often, persons with disabilities are deprived of their autonomy to exercise their voting rights and to choose who to marry, where to live and how to relate to others in the community because of perceived or actual deficiencies in mental capacity and decision-making ability. Persons suffering from cognitive or psychosocial disabilities, and often children and young persons with these disabilities, are most at risk of being deprived of their legal capacity and equal treatment under the law. The Special Rapporteur urges States to take measures to ensure that no one is at any time deprived of their legal capacity due to their disability. Instead, support should be provided to enhance their capacity to exercise the rights and duties that they hold as human beings. (Paragraph 70)
