Submitted by crinadmin on
Summary: Report from a side event at the 10th session of the Human Rights Council on child rights in the Universal Periodic Review process. The meeting was chaired by Cecile Trochu-Grasso from the World Organisations Against Torture and Convenor of the Working Group of the NGO Group for the CRC on the Human Rights Council. She explained that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss how the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process can be used by child rights NGOs to advocate for integration of children's rights in the Human Rights Council. Read the rest of his presentation here
Simon Flacks from CRIN, presented some preliminary results from the analysis done by the Working Group on how child rights had been dealt with in the first two sessions of the UPR. He said that although there had been consideration of children's rights during the process, there remained much room for improvement. He offered suggestions for improving the impact of submissions, and emphasised the need for synchronising the information in the submissions, and lobbying efforts.
Roberto Vellano, First Councellor of the Permanent Mission of Italy to the UN in Geneva,
Civil society organisations and NHRI should play a role a role at national level in assisting in formulating technical recommendations and practical measures, particularly as the space to participate during the debate is quite restricted with long lists of speakers.
Further he said that recommendations on children's rights are more likely to be accepted than others, but of course certain issues are more difficult than others such as the death penalty, freedom of expression, reproductive health for girls, various forms of discrimination against migrant children and other minorities, administration of juvenile justice, etc.
Joel Mermet from OHCHR said that NGOs should regard submissions as more than jut a submission, but a strategy paper and advocacy tool. On a practical note, he said it was important to follow the rules for the submissions, particularly in terms of length, language and clarity. He also said that an executive summary of each report would be very useful.
On substance, he explained that it was up to NGOs to decide whether they wanted to do joint submissions or not. What is very important ultimately is to prioritise, offer concrete recommendations and think about follow up.”If you want to have an impact you should tell us what you think States should do, be pragmatic, specific, give time bound recommendations,, both in thinking about the short term, but also the long term.
Roland Chauville, from UPR info presented some figures on how child rights had been raised in the UPR process, in the Working Groups, etc. Some of the over arching themes included ratification of instruments, including the CRC and its Optional Protocol, reservations, implementation of the CRC recommendations, visits of special rapporteurs, and corporal punishment. He said the same issues will often be raised again and again by the same state, for instance, Italy often brought up corporal punishment.
Answering a question from Roberta Ceccheti, Save the Children Alliance, on how they use NGO submissions, Mr Vellano said they gave specific attention to them as they feel that the stakeholder [NGO] reports raise issues that can be more relevant and they will often be more open in addressing them. He also said that that they may contact their embassy in a given country to request further information .
Maja Andrijasevic-Boko from the CRC Secretariat said that the Committee on the Rights of the Child would be concerned if they heard that their recommendations had been rejected by States in the UPR process.
Paulo David from OHCHR said that we had to look beyond statistics and look at the quality of the process and what is being discussed. He said that child rights seemed to have been addressed in recommendations and reports but the rights that were addressed were in relation to welfare and protection – not in relation to participation rights or freedom of association for instance. He recommended that NGOs take the anaylsis one step further and analyse discrepancies and gaps between the CRC and Special Procedures recommendations and those of the UPR.
On substance, he explained that it was up to NGOs to decide whether they wanted to do joint submissions or not. What is very important ultimately is to prioritise, offer concrete recommendations and think about follow up.”If you want to have an impact you should tell us what you think States should do, be pragmatic, specific, give time bound recommendations,, both in thinking about the short term, but also the long term.
Further information