childProtec

International Human Rights and Children’s Rights
One of the most important ways in which the United Nations fosters the development and strengthening of international human rights law is through the adoption of treaties and conventions such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We shall, therefore, begin our study of the convention by putting it in the broader context of the United Nations treaty-making process. That process, from the initiation to the implementation of treaties, has been heavily criticized in recent years. Among other things, as we will see in this chapter, critics have attacked the seemingly casual way in which decisions have been made regarding the drafting of treaties and the resulting loss of what they have called “quality control” in the treaty-making process. As a result, the critics charge, normative inconsistencies have occurred among different treaties and conventions, and implementation mechanisms that do not function properly have proliferated. Would such criticisms apply as well to the Convention on the Rights of the Child? We shall begin by looking more closely at the nature and criticisms of the treaty-making process. Then, taking these into account, we shall examine the initiation stage in the conclusion of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
After a decade-long drafting period, the U.N. General Assembly unanimously adopted an extraordinary document, the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Convention is unprecedented in its universality and rapidity of ratification and accession. Almost every nation of the world has ratified or acceded to the Convention. At this writing, only the United States-a signatory but not a party to the Convention -and Somalia, are exceptions.(Skinner, p.98) One might argue that this near-unanimity is indicative only of the ease in attracting pro-child sloganeering, no matter what the cultural differences may be in how those slogans are understood. Although such an observation undoubtedly has some power in explaining the politics of ratification in many countries, one should not assume that ratification is meaningless or that it is the product of purely cynical motives.
Two facts weigh against such an interpretation. First, the drafters of the Convention established a system of monitoring implementation that is of unprecedented scope. Each state party to the Convention is obligated to produce a periodic report for review by a U.N. committee of experts serving in their personal capacity. Although the Committee on the Rights of the Child does take this responsibility seriously, the important structural innovation is that the Convention provides that U.N. agencies, expressly including UNICEF, and “other competent bodies” may offer “expert advice” or technical assistance in the process of monitoring and implementation (Murshed, p.60).
That fact would be unimportant but for the second fact: The content of the Convention is also of unprecedented scope. The Convention is neither narrow nor trite. Unlike many expositions of children’s rights, it does not consist merely of platitudes. Not only is the number of rights recognized under the Convention remarkable (fifty-four articles, most with multiple sections), but their theoretical coherence is also striking-an intellectual integration that is all the more stunning when one considers the process by which the Convention was drafted.
The authors of the Convention adopted a constitutional approach to children’s rights, in which they adopted expansive language covering a broad range of domains of children’s lives. More than any other global human rights treaty, the Convention integrates civil and political rights with social and economic rights. The common theme is the requisite of dignity for children-a word that appears often in the Convention expressly and that permeates it conceptually.
Article 27 is a particularly meaningful illustration. By its adoption, “States Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child’s physical, mental, spiritual, moral, and social development.”(Mendelson, p. 29) Note that this provision, which seems on its face to establish an extraordinarily broad entitlement, is “constitutional” not “statutory” in form. It does not establish a checklist of mandates or prohibitions for states parties. Rather, Article 27 provides a principle to guide the global community in regard to the minimum scope-that which is by right-of social policies intended to promote the welfare of children.
In short, the Convention, when combined with the Preamble, requires states parties to ensure the availability of the requisites for children’s full participation in society. Therefore, Article 27 demands a standard of living sufficient to achieve personal independence at such a level in the domains listed within the article. This interpretation is consistent with the underlying theory of Convention-that children, as persons, are owed respect for their dignity. Within such a framework, it is necessary but insufficient to fulfill the rudiments of citizenship. Civil and political rights are not enough. Friendships, family relationships, work, study, play, and spirituality are all essential to the human experience. Such are the aspects of children’s lives that define them as persons and that enable their development as individuals worthy of respect and respectful of others-capable of living, as the Preamble admonishes, “in the spirit of the ideals proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular in the spirit of peace, dignity, tolerance, freedom, equality, and solidarity.”(Lopez-Calva, p.41) The Convention properly mandates states parties to guarantee children the standard of living necessary to achieve individuality in the fundamental domains of life.
At the same time, the Convention does demand meaningful opportunities for children’s civil and political involvement (the nature of that participation necessarily evolving developmentally), presumably including the education necessary to be an informed participant in democratic processes.This understanding must be translated in concrete criteria that may guide the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child as well as policymakers in each state party. Accomplishment of this objective presents difficult challenges for social scientists. Several points are noteworthy in that regard.
One of the main topics to be elaborated on is Child labor. Child labor is the most prevalent source of child exploitation and child abuse in the world today. At least 250 million children between the ages of five and fourteen are working in developing countries. Approximately 120 million of these children work full-time, and tens of millions of these children work under oppressive, exploitative, and hazardous, conditions. According to recent global estimates by the International Labor Organization (ILO), “the majority of the world’s working children are found in Asia (61%), followed by Africa (32 %) and Latin America and the Caribbean (7%). Africa, the world’s poorest region, has the highest incidence of child workers-approximately 40%-while the corresponding figure for Asia and Latin America is about 20%.”(Gordon, p. 341) The United Nations Children’s Fund (“UNICEF”) estimates that hundreds of millions of children worldwide under the age of fifteen are employed.
Traditional governmental approaches to preventing the premature entry of children into the workforce include the enactment and enforcement of child labor legislation and compulsory primary education. These efforts, while noble and necessary, fall short of eliminating the problem. Children need special protection and should be given opportunities, by law and other means, to enable them to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually, and socially in a healthy and normal manner, with freedom and dignity. As such, international law should be relied upon to put an end to the abuse.
Consolidated global statistics on child labor are elusive, not only because of difficulties involved in designing and implementing surveys but also because of differing definitions and perceptions about what constitutes a child, a child worker, or child labor. While the definition of childhood may vary significantly from society to society, this paper adopts the International Labor Organization’s cut-off for the acceptable minimum working age, which is 15 years. The ILO estimates that “the number of children between the ages of 5 and 14 who are working in some kind of economic activity around the world is about 250 million.” (LeBlanc, p.135)
For the large number of children who are forced to work in situations that compromise their development, child labor is an abuse of their fundamental human rights. The principal reason why such work is seen as socially and morally unacceptable is that such work hinders “the harmonious physical and mental development of the child.” (Beaumont, p.59) Of course, not all children work in exploitative conditions. This paper is concerned with the children who work in conditions that fit the criteria set out by the United Nations Children’s Fund as being exploitative. The criteria include full-time work at too early an age; too many hours spent working; work that exerts undue physical, social or psychological stress and is detrimental to full social and psychological development; work that hampers access to education, undermines children's dignity and self-esteem, imposes too much responsibility, and/or is poorly paid. The fact that most child labor is illegal exacerbates these problems. The laws make no provision for safeguarding the working conditions of children because they are a “labor force outside the law.” (Davis, p.35) Child laborers do not enjoy the right to claim the social and legal benefits that should be due to them, making them particularly vulnerable to abuse, and largely incapable of protecting themselves.
Even though there is substantial historical and economic evidence suggesting that economic development and modernization are key factors in eliminating child labor, direct government intervention often centers on legislation. Laws specifying the minimum age of entry to employment, prohibiting child employment in certain occupations or activities, and regulating it where it is legally permitted, have been enacted in almost every country in the world (160 countries have some sort of child labor legislation). The minimum age for working varies from 12 to 18 years depending on the definition of work in the country. Definitions of work, however, differ considerably between countries and have led to a haphazard pattern of national laws.
Another important issue- is children participating in the war activities throughout the world. Approximately 250,000 children are presently participating as soldiers in government armed forces or armed opposition groups in 33 current or recent conflicts around the world. In the majority of cases, “these children are younger than 15 years old, the minimum recruitment age specified by the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child” (Beaumont, p. 45). Although concerns have been raised by various human rights organizations and international bodies about the impact of participation in hostilities on child soldiers, there has been little written on the subject from a psychological perspective. Large numbers of children are conscripted into armed forces. In Central and West Africa alone, the commonly cited figure of 20,000-50,000 child soldiers is considered an underestimate of the real extent of this problem. Children as young as 8-10 years are being conscripted by both government and opposition forces. The vast majority of these children (approximately 90%) are male. The phenomenon of child soldiers would appear to be geographically pandemic, but is particularly prevalent in the developing world.
The majority of child soldiers appear to initiate their own involvement in situations of political conflict and view themselves as fighting for social justice, as, for example, children who have self-enlisted in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and the West Bank and Occupied Territories. In addition to the experience of social and economic injustice, reasons for choosing involvement may include children’s objective war-related experiences and subjective appraisals of these experiences, their social and ideological milieu, the attitudes of those within it toward their participation, and the influences of developmental processes. However, considering the strong influence of external pressures in determining decisions to participate, a child’s involvement in the military could never be regarded as entirely voluntary.
The Convention suggests that the media should be mobilized for prevention and rehabilitation. The media should acknowledge its responsibility to educate the public about needs of children caught in armed conflict and not sensationalize violence or compound the trauma. The Study makes various practical suggestions about how governments and national and international organizations can facilitate media coverage promoting the well being of children. For example, offering incentives for good coverage, such as prizes and awards, and providing media personnel with good quality information on emerging issues such as child soldiers may increase responsible reporting. Governments should ban or censor war films and prohibit the sale of war toys and games in war-torn countries.
The Convention also suggests that the UN and the international community pressure national governments and militias to raise the minimum age of conscription from 15 to 18 years and ensure that this age limit is strictly enforced. The need for disseminating principles contained in the CRC is emphasized, particularly those stating that children should not participate in armed conflict. The Convention recognizes that “these recommendations must take place in the context of general demilitarization of society and restoration of basic human values and standards, as well as economic justice and equity.”(Basu, p. 85)
What is more important is defying of the children torture. The physical and psychological cruelties inflicted upon bonded children in some instances could be considered torture, and are prohibited by customary international law and treaty. The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment contains a broad mandate that proscribes official torture, and section 702(d) of the Restatement states that international law is violated if, as a matter of state policy, a state practices, encourages, or condones torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. This broad definition should apply when states condone the cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment suffered by children in bonded labor.
The adoption of children protective legislation and its enforcement is quite essential for the countries throughout the world and has clear objectives. For instance, by making schooling compulsory, children are presumably deprived of the option to work, thus helping to eliminate child labor. The enforcement of the labor laws by government agencies is supposed to entail inspecting factories. Since enforcement of labor laws is a direct action that governments can take-“ostensibly eliminating child labor-it is often seen as their main policy instrument.”(Andrews, p. 248) However, it is clear that the passing of national laws has not resulted in an eradication of child labor. Most countries do have laws making education compulsory and regulating the minimum age for work; yet, the incidence of child labor varies considerably across these countries, suggesting that such national laws do not correlate closely with child labor levels.
One obvious reason for this is that the enforcement of laws in many developing countries is grossly inadequate. While most countries have some form of labor inspection, and 118 countries have ratified the Labor Inspection Convention in the year of 1947, enforcement remains a serious problem. There are reports on Legislation and Enforcement notes that labor inspectorates in developing countries tend to be understaffed and overburdened with many functions beyond child labor law enforcement. Many countries do not have labor inspectors trained in detecting child labor. Inspectors also lack transportation to take them to establishments outside the major cities. The very areas inspectors visit least-rural areas--have the largest number of working children and greatest exploitation. Other limitations to labor inspectors derive from inaccessible workplaces (such as domestic homes) and the large number of unregistered establishments that employ children.
Bibliography
Andrews, Arlene. Implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Standard of Living Adequate for Development. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1999.
Basu, Kaushik. “International Labor Standards and Child Labor.” Challenge, Vol. 42, (Summer 1999): 27-34.
Beaumont, Paul. The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Davis, Jerome. Labor Problems in America. Chicago: Farrar and Rinehart, 2000-reprinted edition.
Gordon, Richard. Human Rights in the United Kingdom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
LeBlanc, Lawrence. The Convention on the Rights of the Child: United Nations Lawmaking on Human Rights. University of Nebraska Press, 2000.
Lopez-Calva, Luis. “Child Labor: Myths, Theories and Facts.” Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 55, (Spring 2001):34-45.
Mendelson, Michaela. “Child Soldiers: Phychosocial Implications of the Graca.” Peace and Conflict, Vol.4,(Summer 1998): 21-27.
Murshed, Madiha. “Unraveling Child Labor and Labor Legislation.” Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 55,(Autumn, 2001): 58-69.
Skinner, Elliot. “Child Soldiers in Africa: A Disaster for Future Families.” Journal of Internaional Affairs, Vol. 16, (Spring 1999): 94-104.