Networking in the Child Rights Community

Summary: Written by Denise Allen for University
of Gent International Interdisciplinary
Course on Children's Rights. NGO
networking and participation in
drafting, monitoring and promoting
the CRC had an unprecedented
impact. NGOs not customarily
involved in human rights joined
forces to promote child rights and to
hold governments accountable.Networking in the NGO Community

NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Denise Allen

UNIVERSITY OF GENT INTERNATIONAL INTERDISCIPLINARY
COURSE ON
CHILDREN'S RIGHTS

Introduction

The notion of networking is not new and is in keeping with the
popular maxim which states, " there is strength in unity."
Networking
assumes that the parties involved wish to co-operate. Co-
operation
for realisation of a common goal very much depends on members
commitment and agreement on the modality for achievement. The
networking of international NGOs to participate in the drafting
process and later monitoring and promotion of the Convention of
the
Rights of the Child had a profound impact not seen before in
human
rights history. National NGOs not customarily involved in human
rights have also joined forces to promote the rights of children
and
to hold their governments accountable in a manner laid out in the
Convention. This paper discusses some of the complexities of
NGO
networking in child rights promotion, drawing on the experiences
of
several child rights networks (popularly known as national
coalitions) and the NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights
of the
Child, perhaps the largest international network concerned with
promoting the Convention. But first, an introduction to both
networks.

The NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child

Prior to having its present name, the NGO Group for the CRC was
known
as the Informal Ad Hoc Group for the Convention on the Rights of
the
Child. It was formed in 1983 by a group of INGOs to participate in
the drafting of the Convention. Subsequent to the Convention
coming
into force at the November 1989 session of the UN General
Assembly,
the NGO Group adopted its present name and has since grown in
membership to its present total of 44 INGOs of various
persuasions.
The NGO Group's stated mission is to facilitate the promotion,
implementation and monitoring of the Convention on the Rights
of the
Child. Over the years the network has been a platform for action
for
its members, influencing mainly the UN system but also regional
and
national forums. Among its long list of accomplishments are:

* its active participation in the Graca Machel Study of children in
armed conflict and the creation of the Coalition to Stop the Use of
Child Soldiers;

* arising from the 1996 World Congress in Stockholm, creating
the
Focal Point on Sexual Exploitation, a key player for promoting and
facilitating information exchange and monitoring developments
related
to sexual exploitation of children world-wide;

* its sustained and active participation in the UN Working Groups
for
the Optional Protocol on Children in Armed Conflict and the
Optional
Protocol on Sexual Exploitation of Children;

* its ongoing facilitation of NGO participation in the Committee on
the Rights of the Child annual Theme Days designed to examine
issues
pertaining to the Convention;

* it continues to enable national coalitions to submit alternative
reports or commentaries to the Committee and attend the pre-
sessions,
thereby giving them the opportunity to influence outcome of the
meeting between their governments and the Committee;

* it participates in other UN forums to promote children's issues
such as the ILO meetings leading up to Convention 182 coming
into
force.

* Its participation and monitoring of other UN agencies concerned
with internationally organised crime including the trafficking of
children.

Despite having said all this about the NGO Group's
accomplishments,
like many other networks, it is faced with several challenges,
such
as:

* Disparities in the interest and participation of representatives

* Disparities in the degree to which member organizations are
committed

* Some members having greater influence than others

* Funding and particularly lack of it, which poses limitations on
accomplishments

* A reliance on volunteer representatives, rather than full-time
paid
staff, which at times negatively affect the pace of work

National Coalitions

The ratification of the UN Convention by 191 member states
prompted
an unprecedented organisation among NGOs and other sectors
within
civil society to form national coalitions. For the most part NGOs
have taken the lead in forming these networks to promote and
monitor
the implementation of the Convention. There are approximately
77
known national coalitions across the world:

* 17 in Africa, mainly in the sub-Saharan region

* 24 in the Americas, most in Latin America and only 3 in the
Caribbean

* 9 in Asia and there does not appear to be any significant
pattern
in the spread

* 22 in Europe with approximately one-third representing Central
and
Eastern European states

* 5 in the Middle East – Yemen, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and
Israel.

Possibly the greatest motivation behind the formation of these
structures is the provision made in article 45a of the Convention
which states:

The Committee may invite the specialised agencies, the United
Nations
Children's Fund and other competent bodies as it may consider
appropriate to provide expert advice on the implementation of
the
Convention in areas falling within the scope of their respective
mandate's

This article opened the gateway for NGOs, particularly those
working
with children or on children's issues, to have a voice in the
international arena not normally available to local organizations.
Through a collective effort they could not only carry their concerns
and recommendations beyond their countries's boundaries but
also have
it return within the UN Committee's Concluding Observations.

National coalitions take several forms, usually determined by the
national context and capacities of their membership. Nonetheless
certain features seem to dominate:

* NGOs predominantly constitute national coalitions with
additional
members, associates or observers from other sectors including
government agencies ;

* most had their genesis when it became necessary to draft an
alternative report to the initial state report for the UN Committee
on the Rights of the Child ;

* many have embraced promoting the Convention through public
education and training ;

* most seek to influence the government at a variety of levels
and
employ several strategies, usually to realise legislative and policy
reform;

* many are issue focused and therefore organise advocacy
activities
in accordance with thematic interests, such as child labour or
refugee children ;

* particularly in the third world, national coalitions serve as
convenient donor recipients for international donors who do not
wish
to give assistance to individual NGOs ;

* their relationships with governments are usually characterised
as
strained and at best tolerated on both sides of the fence;

* after reporting process with the UN Committee is completed,
most
coalitions grapple with problems of maintaining an ongoing
monitoring
system and retaining members's enthusiasm.

In a few countries such as India and Nepal several child rights
networks exist. Some focus exclusively on the Convention while
others
take a thematic approach with the Convention as the subsidiary
basis
for their existence. This mix of thematic networks and national
coalitions at times make delineation very difficult both for the
outsider and the organisations involved. Not surprisingly in those
situations it is common to find not only the same organisations
but
also the same people attending meetings. Some regions have
sought to
rationalise these networks with varying levels of success. In
Central
America for example, there appears to be an understanding
among the
coalitions in that region that co-operation takes place on a
thematic
basis. Hence NGOs that work on similar themes collaborate. This
co-
operation was reportedly quite successful for national coalitions
in
the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch, which devastated the region in
1998. Through these thematic groupings they were able to make
effective interventions at national and international levels, on
behalf of vulnerable children. While this example shows the
potentials for combining thematic interests with national coalition,
whether at regional or national level, such occurrences are quite
rare.

The Organisation of National Coalitions

Although it might seem obvious to say that the Convention is
here to
stay, the child rights networking community has yet to fully come
to
terms with this fact. Most national coalitions began ill prepared to
stay the course for the long run. Consequently after reporting to
the
UN Committee many became dormant, not able to keep their
members
motivated and active. Some are contentious and strained since
member
organizations distrust or compete with each other, or
personalities
clash. Particularly in the developing world, national coalitions lose
their vibrancy and attractiveness when external donors cease to
provide funding. It seems therefore that issues related to
coalition
formation and sustainment need to be squarely addressed.

For several NGOs, membership to national coalitions meant
assisting
with drafting their Alternative Report and possibly subscribing to
a
few promotional activities. Their commitment was therefore tied
to
very specific tasks that did not necessitate giving more than the
resources and time necessary for execution and completion. But
long
term commitment suggests that members must also have
individual
organisational commitment that goes beyond the enthusiastic
staff
member/volunteer or two. It demands that member organizations
embrace
the Convention in their mission or mandate, policy and
programmes. In
the United Kingdom the child rights organisation has initiated an
interesting programme in that regard. NGOs are encouraged
to 'adopt'
the Convention. Adoption means that the organisation is
prepared
include the Convention in their overall work and use it to audit
their policies and practice.

Although all NGOs usually enter coalition members on an equal
basis
and expected to fulfil certain minimum requirements, often most
do
not contribute in the manner anticipated. It may be useful
therefore,
to provide a range of options for NGOs to get involved with a time
frame for review and recommitment. Few national coalitions have
exploited the potentials of creating a range of status within the
membership framework, such as associate, consultant, partner or
observer. Instead of engaging all members on an equal basis
when they
are clearly not equal, the provision of these options would enable
interested organizations to determine where best they might be
suited
given their expertise and interests. Nor should membership be a
fixed
state, girded by several bi-laws, as is the case of some coalitions.
Little is gained from creating an inflexible system. Instead,
periodically members ought to be invited to review their
participation and make a re-commitment on a basis that is
feasible
for both parties.

A natural consequence of these suggestions is that member
organizations must take a rational approach to making decisions
about
retaining membership or joining national coalitions. Hurriedly
joining the group to produce an Alternative Report while
permissible
at the initial stage ought to move to a process of review and
renewed
commitment. NGOs must answer for themselves such questions
as:

* What are the points of convergence and divergence between
the
coalition's mission and the organisation's

* What are the implications for membership and what form
should
continued involvement take?

* What and how much resource would the organisation commit to
fulfilling these obligations?

Without a rational approach, coalitions seem to fall victim to
participants representing themselves rather than their
organizations.
It should also be said that in a few instances, national coalitions
also have individuals as members. However the notions of varied
types
of membership and review are also applicable.

Quite apart from these organisational issues there are other
important questions pertaining to sustaining networks, that are
worth
discussing.

Should institutional structures or goals define national coalitions?

Over the years several national coalitions have moved from being
loose networks to formal networks, and in some instances
eventually
become NGOs with full legal status. The difficulty with this kind of
evolution is that the coalition ceases to be membership driven.
Members are more inclined to expect the coalition to define and
pursue its work with minimal reliance on them, thereby
weakening
members's stake and commitment. Secondly the costs associated
with
setting up and maintaining an agency could in some instances,
compromise the coalition's capacities for advocacy, monitoring
and
other programme work. As a membership network national
coalition's
legitimacy comes not from registering with the requisite
government
bureau, but rather from the legal status and reputation of its
members. However we are mindful that in some countries
national
coalitions have registered in order to be recognised as a
legitimate
human rights group.

The converse approach to determining institutional structure is
one
whereby the coalition’s goals and commensurate tasks define
that structure. This approach may not necessarily add very much
by
way of institution building, but it does ensure that the coalition
maximise its impact. The Venezuelan coalition appears to have
this
model, as the coalition is regarded as a platform for action.
Membership is loosely defined allowing a wide range of players in
civil society to enter and accomplish specific tasks compatible with
advancing child rights. As a platform for action, participating
organisations are likely to be highly motivated and committed at
least for the duration of their project.

Should national coalitions be issue focused?

The experiences of several national coalitions suggest that
without
an issue or issues for advocacy, dynamism within the networks
die.
For many, attempting to monitor the country's progress utilising
the
Convention as a whole or UN Committee's Concluding
Observations far
out way their capacities in data collection, economical and social
analysis, and all the other technical resources needed for such
purposes. It seems that issues, such as child prostitution or
children in detention, provide sufficient substance for NGOs to
create and pursue meaningful action for change. The extent to
which
they are able to call public attention to these problems or
persuade
government officials to introduce regulations to further protect
vulnerable children, not only give coalitions a public face but also
a means of gauging progress and impact.

There are a few networks that have designed and maintained
effective
methods for monitoring the implementation of the Convention
and in
particular the Concluding Observations. Several others attempt to
monitor the state by seeking or accepting invitations to join
government appointed multi-sectoral monitoring
committees/commissions. Often the difficulty with many such
monitoring commissions is that they exist outside the state
bureaucracy and lack the necessary legal or policy clout to ensure
child rights protection. Secondly national coalitions run the risk of
losing their a separate and distinct identity necessary for playing
the 'watch dog' role that is most essential.

Should coalitions do service delivery work?

In the continent of Africa it is not unusual to find national
coalitions in service delivery. Some NGO members having the
same
programme interests (for example health) found the coalition a
useful
avenue for co-operation. Through the network they were able to
attract funding from large donors to do work at a scale that
would
not have been otherwise possible. However, for many NGOs
unaccustomed
to doing joint advocacy, service delivery not strategically
employed,
derails the process of influencing for lasting change.

Should national coalitions work towards mainstreaming child
rights?

Child Rights is human rights for children. Like women's rights, it
gives greater recognition that children are human beings, fully
entitled to enjoy all the rights of this status. A significant
percent of NGOs that compose national coalitions are not human
rights
organisations, but instead child welfare. Therefore the knowledge
and
experience in human rights within these coalitions are severely
limited. It seems that as child rights is just one aspect of human
rights; more could be accomplished by mainstreaming children's
rights
into the wider human rights arena. Mainstreaming suggests that:

* There would be a close association between national coalitions
and
human rights organisations;

* national coalitions would expose members to other human
rights
treaties and treaty body mechanisms:

* national coalitions would seek to submit reports to the other
UN
human rights treaty committees, providing them with the much
needed
child perspective.

Conclusion

The Convention on the Rights of the Child is here to stay. It is
therefore imperative that the NGO community finds solutions for
maintaining a dynamic role in the Convention's promotion and
implementation. The issues raised above draw attention to some
of the
critical areas that must be addressed for sustained participation
by
national coalitions and NGOs on a whole. The NGO Group for the
CRC
has an expressed commitment to support the creation and
sustainment
of national coalitions. We wish to not only encourage the debate
with
the aim of finding answers, but also to enable a dynamic
exchange
among national coalitions that strengthens capacities and
commitment
of purpose.pdf: www.crin.org/docs/resources/publications/networking.pdf