Experts of the Committee on the Rights of the Child Commend Slovakia on Platforms Created to Support Children’s Participation, Raise Questions on Child Justice and the Use of “Baby Boxes”
The Committee on the Rights of the Child today concluded its review of the sixth periodic report of Slovakia, with Committee Experts commending the State on platforms developed to support children’s participation, while raising questions on access to justice for children and the use of “baby boxes”.
Velina Todorova, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, said the Committee highly commended the platforms created to support children’s participation.
Ms. Todorova said access to justice for children remained challenging for those in disadvantaged communities. Could more information on this issue be provided? There was a document which stated that the hearing of a child in court was at the discretion of the judge; was this correct?
Ann Skelton, Committee Chairperson and Taskforce Member, said in 2016, the Committee had asked Slovakia to cease using “baby boxes” and find alternatives for receiving children. Despite changes in terminology, it appeared that this method of receiving abandoned children was still in use. What were the updated guidelines to ensure the protection of children’s right to identity? It was understood that anonymous hospital births were possible; what did this mean? Was the information about the child’s origin retained in some way and would it be accessible for the child at a later date?
The delegation said legislation created in 2015 regulated provisions regarding the rights of the child in civil proceedings. This included being heard in court by a judge. Child-friendly justice did not speak about a space or a position; it was mainly about the cooperation among the people who were engaged in supporting children. It was important to make justice more understandable for children. The Barnhaus project from Iceland was considered to be one of the best practices to help children who had experienced or witnessed some kind of violence. The model had been implemented last year and legislation was being adjusted so the Barnhaus project could be built in Slovakia.
The delegation said “Baby Boxes” had been very effective in Slovakia, as they decreased the risk of newborn deaths. In some cases, mothers delivered in a hospital and asked for anonymity. In these cases, a report was created and released the day the mother left hospital, which stated the gender of the child. A paediatrician in the hospital provided health care to children as soon as they were found in the “Baby Box”. All information needed to be gathered in three days, including the approximate day of birth. In 2023, there were 49 anonymous births and seven newborns were placed in “Baby Boxes.” A camera was placed in the “Baby Box” and the video was required to be monitored in a room where a doctor was present.
Peter Pamula, State Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic and head of the delegation, presenting the report, said the State sought to actively involve children in policy-making. An event had been held across different regions, involving musical instruments, which aimed to allow children to be heard. Government officials took part in the event and listened to the children and responded to their questions. The Slovak Republic had adopted the European Child Guarantee, an initiative created jointly by the Member States of the European Union in 2021 to combat poverty and social exclusion of children. In April 2023, an action plan was developed, which aimed to address issues such as lack of housing, poor access to health care, inadequate nutrition, early school leaving, and high unemployment, which were often the reasons and consequences of poverty.
In closing remarks, Ms. Todorova commended Slovakia for its efforts to pursue the implementation of the Convention. The Committee believed their concluding observations would be taken very seriously, particularly in the areas of multisectoral policies, child participation, deinstitutionalisation, education, and protection against discrimination. Ms. Todorova wished Slovakia every success in this endeavour.
Mr. Pamula, in his closing remarks, thanked the Committee for the open, constructive dialogue, which had helped to identify further challenges to be tackled. Slovakia would adopt all measures to support deinstitutionalisation and alternative care, adopt further measures to support families, and increase the level of tolerance in society, so that differences were not a decisive factor.
The delegation of Slovakia was comprised of representatives from the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family; the Ministry of Education, Research, Development and Youth; the Ministry of Health; the Ministry of Interior; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs; the General Prosecution; the Commissioner for Children; and the Permanent Mission of Slovakia to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s ninety-eighth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3. pm on Tuesday, 14 January, to begin its consideration of the combined fifth and sixth periodic report of Eritrea (CRC/C/ERI/5-6).
Report
The Committee has before it the sixth periodic report of Slovakia (CRC/C/SVK/6).
Presentation of Report
PETER PAMULA, State Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic and head of the delegation, said Slovakia had worked intensively over the past more than 10 years to build and strengthen multi-sectoral cooperation, which was anchored legislatively in the 2019 Law on State Administration Bodies in the Field of Social Affairs, Family and Employment Services. Although Slovakia was a small country, its regions were diverse, which meant that cooperation took place not only at the national level but also as the regional level, thus ensuring the necessary flexibility in dealing with challenges and difficult situations. Cooperation between the police, schools, municipalities, non-governmental organizations, churches, and medical personnel was supported by coordinators for the protection of children from violence. The position of Coordinator for Protection of Children from Violence was created in 2017, and there were currently, 46 coordinators working across all regions of Slovakia.
The State sought to actively involve children in policy-making. An event had been held across different regions, involving musical instruments, which aimed to allow children to be heard. Government officials took part in the event and listened to the children and responded to their questions. In February 2020, the Government adopted resolution no. 63/2020, approving the Strategy of Child Protection in the Digital Space. This Strategy contained measures aimed at prevention and intervention regarding threats faced by children in the online environment, and included support for victims and perpetrators of online violence.
The Slovak Republic had adopted the European Child Guarantee, an initiative created jointly by the Member States of the European Union in 2021 to combat poverty and social exclusion of children. In April 2023, an action plan was developed, which aimed to address issues such as lack of housing, poor access to health care, inadequate nutrition, early school leaving, and high unemployment, which were often the reasons and consequences of poverty. Specific measures included the creation of school support teams for children, especially those from Roma communities and children with disabilities. Second chance education was offered to children who had left school prematurely. In 2025, combatting menstrual poverty would be one of the priorities. An important element in fighting poverty was the involvement of experts, non-governmental organizations and children themselves in the planning and evaluation of measures taken. It was essential that work took into account the true needs of each region.
Slovakia highly valued the international cooperation with the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the European Union. The country was an affiliated organization of the international network Children of Prisoners Europe, which enabled Slovakia to better address the rights of children growing up in families with imprisoned parents. Mr. Pamula concluded by stating that Slovakia was committed to the protection of children's rights and ensured that their voices were always heard regarding decisions about their future.
Questions by Committee Experts
VELINA TODOROVA, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, commended Slovakia for the good progress made in several components of implementation of the Convention. It had been difficult to read Slovakian legislation as there were no translations in languages other than Slovak. Some data provided was also difficult to understand. The Committee was aware that the State believed current legislation sufficed for child protection. However, the Committee believed that domestic legislation in Slovakia did not fully incorporate the Convention and its Optional Protocols. Could the delegation provide more information on this matter?
For years, Slovak policies had been guided by strategies and action plans regarding the implementation of the Convention, which had ceased in 2018. What were the challenges in the process of Convention implementation? How was the Government planning to implement the multisectoral policy on Convention rights? The recently established national coordination centre was considered as a good practice, which monitored the progress achieved regarding the fulfilment of the Convention. Would the Government consider assigning this centre with an overall coordination mandate? Issues relating to resources and data collection were not well covered in the Government report; it was clear previous recommendations were not considered. There were alarming gaps in data collection of children in vulnerable circumstances; could the Government elaborate on this?
While commending the recent innovations relating to access to justice, the Committee highlighted the shortcomings in the anti-discrimination law. Had the State considered additional training for the judiciary on the subject of discrimination? Access to justice for children remained challenging for those in disadvantaged communities. Could more information on this issue be provided? While commending the existence of numerous human rights institutions, including the Commissioner for Children, there were issues relating to their resources and mandates. Had the Paris Principles been implemented? The pressure on non-governmental organizations by the Government was concerning, particularly non-governmental organizations for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex groups. Were the statements made by some politicians on this topic indicative of the view of the State?
The Committee was aware of the process of legitimisation of hate speech and dehumanisation of minorities, such as Roma and migrants, who were being labelled as a threat to security by some politicians. This rhetoric had moved into mainstream dialogue which was dangerous and humiliating. Had the Government evaluated the mental health of the children experiencing this hate discourse? What was planned to address this gross violation of children’s rights? The Committee highly commended the platforms created to support children’s participation. What were the normative conditions for the hearing of children in all judicial situations?
The Committee commended services supporting families of children in situations of conflict, distress and divorce. What were some positive examples taken to prevent family separation?
In 2018, there were 94 children’s homes with a capacity of 5,000 places. The capacity of children’s homes had increased by 100 places since 2013. What was the difference between State and non-State homes for children? Did centres have sufficient capacities and resources? How many Roma professionals were hired in children’s homes? Did the institutions provide residential care? What services did they offer, and which were the most effective? Were there quality standards for services? What were the profiles of children and families benefitting from the centres?
According to data from 2023, approximately 25 per cent of children were at risk of poverty or social exclusion in Slovakia. A lack of education, healthcare and poverty still prevailed in Roma communities. What was the effectiveness of the cash transfers to parents, in terms of school attendance? The Committee appreciated that 1,000 rental flats had been acquired for social housing in 2019. Six children who had been in children’s homes had been granted support for the purchasing of flats which was extremely positive. Could more information about the beneficiaries of the programme be provided?
ANN SKELTON, Committee Chairperson and Taskforce Member, said in 2016, the Committee had asked Slovakia to cease using “baby boxes” and find alternatives for receiving children. Despite changes in terminology, it appeared that this method of receiving abandoned children was still in use. What were the updated guidelines to ensure the protection of children’s right to identity? it was understood that anonymous hospital births were possible; what did this mean? Was the information about the child’s origin retained in some way and would it be accessible for the child at a later date? Were there any policies regarding donor information for births brought about through invitro fertilisation? What policy discussions were happening in this regard?
Was the plan for the protection of children in the digital space being updated? Were the laws providing adequate protection for children? Were these laws providing sufficient protection of children against harmful content? What steps was the Government taking to protect children against the negative impacts of artificial intelligence? What was being done to ensure equal access to digital technologies? Were children permitted to take part in peaceful protests? What was being done to ensure the State moved towards a real prohibition of violence against children?
A government study in 2017 had indicated that 70 per cent of children aged 13-15 had experienced some form of emotional, physical or sexual violence or parental neglect. Had another study been conducted? Was the State tracking whether policies in this regard were making a difference on the ground? What was the Government doing to apply a multi-sectoral approach to avoid the revictimisation of children? Was Slovakia following the approach of conducting just one forensic interview, which was recorded? Could this recording be used as evidence in court? Was Slovakia working on using new software tools to track online sexual exploitation of children? Did children have ways to report negative things happening to them online? Was Slovakia’s data system able to collect information specifically on sexual abuse cases against children?
What was Slovakia doing to outlaw forced marriage and change attitudes? Reports had been received on excessive use of force against Roma children by State law enforcement officials. Had there been any prosecutions of law enforcement officials in this regard?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that in selected regions, children met with adult representatives of different ministries to learn about their rights. What the children said was cited and included in material. The Government supported the Children’s Parliament and activities at the local level. A joint measure had been conducted with Interpol to develop an instrument to identify sexual exploitation of children. Slovakia was a member of the international network Insafe [a European network of awareness centres promoting safe and better use of the Internet], and was required to abide by specific criteria, including the training of experts and pupils.
In 2023, 7,387 children had been placed in a model of family care. In December 2024, there were more than 4,000 children placed in family centres. New measures were continually adopted to support families in order to prevent family separation. The length of stays in institutions was changing. However, it was preferred that children were placed within “professional families”, with assistance from an expert. Institutional care was gradually being moved to family care. The Ministry of Labour had submitted a proposal for a bill which spoke to the intention for all children with disabilities and those from disadvantaged groups to be moved into the substitute family environment. The United Nations Children’s Fund was supporting this endeavour. The Government aimed to visit at least one centre every month, communicate with the children there, and put their suggestions into practice.
Around 250 reports had been received on child sexual abuse, which was an increase on previous years. There was an increase in children who were reporting their cases, rather than adults reporting on their behalf, compared to earlier years. Five offices had been organised throughout the regions, where fundings were allocated from the family budget.
Children in eastern Slovakia could face different problems than children in the west part of the country, due to the differences in the regions. Children’s rights impact evaluation had been developed in coordination with the network of the Child Rights Ombudsman in Europe. A mandate had been received to create a national preventive mechanism under the Optional Protocol. In 2024, the mechanism carried out 11 monitoring visits. The Ombudsman collected information from three different resources. The Commissioner for Children was able to put forward suggestions in legal proceedings; no other human rights institution had this right. Awareness around the Commissioner’s office had increased over the past two years.
The Government had made substantial efforts in awareness raising and had created the Parliament of Children and Youth, which had held five sessions with the Commissioner. Roundtables were organised to increase cooperation with public institutions.
It was important to prevent children from being re-interviewed in judicial proceedings, as this could be harmful for them. If a victim or a perpetrator was a child, they would be supervised by a specialised prosecutor. There were specialised police officers for interviewing children. Specialised prosecutors were obliged to participate in any interviews with a child victim, irrespective of the crime. It was important to ensure the interviews were covered legally. It was possible to use the interview within court proceedings, so it did not need to be repeated. A second interview could be conducted at the request of the child, and this would be done as soon as possible. The participation of people in the room was limited to ensure the child would not be further traumatised. A psychologist could be present in an adjacent room.
Several times a year, prosecutors visited schools to conduct preventive activities against domestic violence and violence online. Children were given information on how to act in certain online situations to avoid becoming victims. Data regarding online crimes was continually being updated. Forced marriages were sometimes carried out; around 20 cases per year. The public was informed, via the media, about the crime of trafficking. A child could report a crime freely, without their parents. The crime would be recorded by the Prosecutor’s Office.
A roadmap had been in place since 2023, enabling the State to increase the number of judges and improve their expertise through a variety of trainings. A training centre had been created in the context of international human rights standards. The Ministry of Justice had developed an action plan for different forms of discrimination. Twenty-five special interviewing rooms had been built for child victims. Two rooms had been built to interview children who were victims of trafficking. Work was being carried out with Roma communities to prevent the crime of forced marriage. Information material had been created in conjunction with multiple agencies, focusing on forced marriages. More than 200 people were trained, including teachers and social workers, to work with Roma and marginalised communities. A training had been organised for local municipal services to increase their awareness and allow for the fast identification of victims of trafficking.
Since 2020, there had been a focus on zero tolerance on police officers using force. In 2022, an internal order was adopted by the Ministry of Interior, mentioning the code of behaviour of police officers, with breaching of the code understood to be a violation of discipline, which would result in sanctions. The training of police officers underscored a zero tolerance on violence as well as training on the use of appropriate means. There had been an incident of force against two minors from the Roma community, who had informed the Office that they had been beaten by police officers as they ran out from their settlement. Despite the investigation, the persons had not been identified and therefore the complaint had not been submitted. A discussion on a possible bill for cooperation with non-governmental organizations had taken place, and a committee had been formed to work on this bill.
“Baby Boxes” had been very effective in Slovakia, as they decreased the risk of newborn deaths. In some cases, mothers delivered in a hospital and asked for anonymity. In these cases, a report was created and released the day the mother left hospital, which stated the gender of the child. A paediatrician in the hospital provided health care to children as soon as they were found in the “Baby Box”. All information needed to be gathered in three days, including the approximate day of birth. In 2023, there were 49 anonymous births and seven newborns were placed in “Baby Boxes.” A guide was published in 2022 relating to the health care of children found in “Baby Boxes”, stating that all health standards were applicable to these children. A camera was placed in the “Baby Box” and the video was required to be monitored in a room where a doctor was present.
Questions by Committee Experts
VELINA TODOROVA, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, said there was a document which stated that the hearing of a child in court was at the discretion of the judge; was this correct? Was it correct that poverty was one of the key reasons why children were placed in children’s homes? How many visits had the Ombudsman made to child and family homes? What were the main issues identified there? Were there any policies or measures for the Government to work with businesses on the human rights of children?
A Committee Expert was happy to learn that Slovakia had taken measures to ensure that child victims were not submitted to repetitive interviews, and were interviewed in a child friendly environment and facilities. When a child had given their statement, would they not need to reappear in court? Did the health system also have child-friendly facilities? Did the Government have a plan for deinstitutionalisation?
Another Expert asked about the national preventive mechanism. Did it have a mandate to visit every place where children were deprived of liberty, including police stations, institutions, and places where migrant children were contained? What kind of training did those who were conducting the visits receive? What was the profile of those visiting the places? Who was training them? What kind of complaints had been raised and how had they been addressed? What was being done to try and prevent mothers from viewing abandoning their children as the only solution? Were there measures in place to address the root causes of abandonment at birth?
THUWAYBA AL BARWANI, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, said in the previous review, the Committee had persistently requested disaggregated data on children with disabilities which had not been made available. Data was crucial for the Committee’s understanding and for better policy development and resource allocation. As of 2022, there were approximately 600 institutionalised children with disabilities. Insufficient funding, a lack of adequate conditions, and shortages of specialised staff were some of the most pressing issues facing child homes. What measures were in place to increase the support for families of children with disabilities, to encourage social inclusion, and to encourage families to care for their children within the home environment. What measures were in place to gradually abolish segregated schools and promote inclusive education for all children?
The funding for the development of daycare facilities for children under the age of three was commendable. What plans did the Government have to accelerate the deinstitutionalisation process, particularly for children under the age of six? Roma children had disproportionally high levels of enrolment in special schools exclusively for Roma, or were otherwise placed in segregated classes. Was this continuing or was it being gradually phased out? How was the Government planning to close the gap in the provision of education? What plans did the Government have to make up for the learning deficit of Roma children, exacerbated during the pandemic? There had been reports on serious student violence in schools, using explosions. What measures had been taken to understand the root causes of this behaviour and protect students in these schools?
ANN MARIE SKELTON, Committee Chairperson and Taskforce Member, asked how the State party would become carbon-neutral by 2050, given the suspension of the climate bill? How far developed were the policies and programmes to address climate change and disaster risk management? Had children been involved in these discussions? Were there any plans to increase children’s awareness regarding natural disasters?
SOPIO KILADZE, Vice Chairperson and Taskforce Member, congratulated Slovakia for all the progress made for children so far. Was there an independent mechanism in place to monitor private hospitals and protect patients? Did Slovak legislation guarantee the right for children to be accompanied by parents or caregivers during hospitalisation? If not, would this gap be addressed? Were there any plans to address increasing levels child obesity? Slovakia’s Mental Health Council was a positive development, however, mental health issues in children and adolescents were increasing. Was there a sufficient number of psychologists in Slovakia and were these psychologists sufficiently trained? Substance abuse among children seemed to be a serious issue. What were plans to address this issue?
Did migrant children have access to schools during temporary protection? Were there time limits for appointments of guardians for unaccompanied children? Were unaccompanied migrant children enrolled in universities provided with guardians and other necessary support? Did national legislation reflect the obligations on the 1954 Convention on the Status of Statelessness? The National Programme for Trafficking 2019 was positive. Were penalties proportionate to the severity of crime. In 2023, a new judicial map came into force, which aimed to increase the credibility of the judiciary. Was free legal aid granted for children in criminal proceedings?
Were there special procedures for children who were alleged to have committed crimes? Was legislation in place to ensure that children could only be questioned in the presence of their lawyers, parents or other caregivers? Was detention of children only used as a last resort? Were children kept together with adults or separately, and were they granted access to all appropriate services? What was the timeline for the adoption of the proposal to amend the Criminal Code to add children in armed conflict as a new offence?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said legislation created in 2015 regulated provisions regarding the rights of the child in civil proceedings. This included being heard in court by a judge. As of December 2024, there were 3,177 children in institutional care, with a certain number placed into family care. Economic and property reasons should not constitute a child’s placement in these settings. Placement should be made following a risk assessment. Slovakia had developed a deinstitutionalisation strategy, focusing on social and alternative care.
Child-friendly justice did not speak about a space or a position; it was mainly about the cooperation among the people who were engaged in supporting children. The Government had been trying to strengthen the strategy for 10 years in a legislative and non-legislative manner. It was important to make justice more understandable for children. The Barnhaus project from Iceland was considered to be one of the best practices to help children who had experienced or witnessed some kind of violence. The model had been implemented last year and legislation was being adjusted so the Barnhaus project could be built in Slovakia.
The Commissioner for Children was an independent organization established in 2015. Each year, the Commissioner presented a report to Parliament on its activity, containing recommendations to resolve certain deficiencies. An extraordinary report could be submitted as required. Since 2020, 68 monitoring visits had been conducted by the Commissioner’s office. The most recurrent findings and recommendations were to secure systemic training in all areas in fields such as medical, health and psychologists. There were also recommendations relating to support children in education processes.
Questions by a Committee Expert
VELINA TODOROVA, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, asked for the relevant legal provision relating to the 2015 legislation on child proceedings. What mechanisms did the judge have to evaluate whether children’s views could be expressed?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said if a child was in custody, the Commissioner had to inform the Prosecutor that he wanted to speak to the child. It was because collusion custody was a situation where the perpetrator could potentially influence witnesses.
When it came to the opinion of a child in civil proceedings, the 2015 law stated that a minor had the right to express their opinion in any affairs which affected the rights of the child, and they had a right to be heard.
A document was created which documented the path of the child in early age, which provided information to families. It aimed to serve as a basis for other documents focused on early care for a young child. The Ministry of Health planned to prepare a model for complex care.
Slovakia had a programme for inclusive education till 2030. This aimed to create an inclusive environment in schools, eliminate barriers for children with disabilities at schools, train teachers, and foster destigmatisation. Slovakia had ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and had a national programme for the development of persons with disabilities. The law on social services focused on families with children with disabilities under the age of seven, to prevent children and families from being excluded from society. There was also an action plan which cited measures, including an inclusive approach for children to develop their potential.
Centres for children and families provided assistance to children with disabilities. Tomorrow, the Government would announce a legislative bill which would ensure that all children younger than six placed into family centres would instead receive care by professional, alternative families.
Slovakia aimed to ensure that all children received the same level of education. A strategy of monitoring was published in 2024 as a first step to introduce the monitoring of segregation risk. The report showed that 23 per cent of primary schools faced the problem of segregation. The pilot project focused on Roma communities where marginalisation was the highest and identified schools which required the most assistance. Monitoring would gradually be spread to a higher level of education.
Several national projects were in place to help mitigate the segregation of Roma, including Roma pupils being placed in specialised schools. A project would be carried out in 15 locations, which would assist Roma-only schools. Thirteen schools had already declared their willingness to participate in the project. The output would be a framework which would be used as a guidance for all schools to address the problem of segregation. In December 2023, segregation in education was recognised as an important issue, and was defined clearly, making it easier to address the phenomenon. In 2024, this definition was further clarified in the Education Law. Preschool education was made compulsory for children of the age of five.
Research was carried out annually, focusing on violence against children and monitoring the behaviour of children before and after the pandemic. Bullying was an issue which was being monitored by the Government. It was important to raise awareness among adults and guide them in understanding which behaviours were important. Slovakia was aware that adults had to be educated in this regard and were responsible for solving this issue. Research had shown that more than one third of children did not talk about their experience of bullying. Guidelines had been created for social and emotional education and resilience, to improve children’s skills and mental health. These guidelines would be published in Slovak and Ukrainian languages.
The delegation said there was a system of complaints available if healthcare was not executed properly, which could be filed at the care facility, the central office for healthcare, or in court. The lack of psychiatrists was dealt with by the Ministry of Health, which built up staff capacities and monitored them closely. The issue of psychiatry was followed by groups of experts who dealt with mental health within the Government. The Ministry of Health supported the continuity of psychiatry and child psychiatry by suggesting bills in Parliament which focused on funding these areas. There was a national action programme in place until 2024 for mental health support. There was a focus on the increase of staff in psychiatry, among other areas.
Every child was entitled to the same healthcare as the mainstream population. They were all entitled to preventive checkups within the social security programme. A programme “Trainers at School” had been in place since 2021, involving 277 primary schools and 17 kindergartens, covering 25,000 children. It helped to reduce the lack of physical skills of children at schools and provide specific training to educators to increase the skillset of teachers. There was also a programme supporting healthy lifestyles which aimed to foster a love of sports in children.
In 2021, Slovakia founded a mental health body which aimed to support the mental health strategy. Helpline support had been initiated to ensure that distance and free counselling was available to people.
The Law on Guardians regulated provisions on unaccompanied minors in Slovakia. Unaccompanied minors were placed in a centre for children and families which were open facilities. The procedure of granting asylum did not begin if the applicant was a minor. This application needed to be submitted by a legal representative or guardian nominated by the court. There were conditions surrounding family reunification, including that those applying must be on Slovak territory and have applied for asylum. The reunification of a child should always take the best interests of the child into consideration.
The Border Police focused on unaccompanied minors and paid significant attention to the best interests of the child. If a non-detention approach could not be used, families with children were detained in a special facility, always together, unless there were specific reasons for separating the family. Educational and leisure activities were provided to minor children who were detained, and they were given access to books, the internet, and daily medical care.
To combat trafficking, the Government had adopted three national programmes, up to the most recent plan spanning 2024–2028. Each plan contained a set of measures which the Government was committed to fulfilling.
Questions by Committee Experts
VELINA TODOROVA, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, asked how many children went through the Slovak justice system? How did the State train judges on justice for children? What happened to children between the ages of 12 and 14 who committed offences? Could policies on abortion for pregnant girls be outlined?
SOPIO KILADZE, Vice Chairperson and Taskforce Member, asked if the multidisciplinary team would be introduced now or later?
THUWAYBA AL BARWANI, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, said the strategy for inclusive education ended in 2030. Were there any targets for the end of the plan? What work was being done from an infrastructure perspective to ensure schools were inclusive? Would there be resources which were available to everyone? Could the level of support for families of children with severe disabilities be explained? Did early childhood education include refugee children and unaccompanied minors?
A Committee Expert said depriving a migrant child of their liberty was unacceptable. Could the nature of the centres discussed by the delegation be further explained?
Another Expert asked how many children had been detained in the last few years? Were there any legal avenues to challenge the detention? Slovakia had received many refugees from Ukraine and should be commended for this. How many children had been accommodated from Ukraine? How many had been assessed as unaccompanied? What was the policy concerning the return of those children to Ukraine?
An Expert asked how many children were placed in foster families? Was there an early detection system for children with disabilities? Was there a law which would refer to children with a high level of disability? Would there be community-based care for these children?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the justice academy provided year-round training for judges, prosecutors and officials who learned about issues of discrimination. Unaccompanied minors were provided with free legal support. If a child came before the court and was to receive a sentence, there were alternative punishment options. The conditional sentences were not carried out in the same centres as adults. The State had received 256 unaccompanied minors from Ukraine. Slovakia would continue to support refugees from Ukraine and additional legislation would be passed in this regard.
There were 516 places available in re-education centres. The centres had undergone several modifications and changes to improve the quality of the work of the employees. Prevention activities were conducted with children and youth in educational centres. Children also had the opportunity to be educated outside the centres. Compulsory school attendance was applied to all children in the territory of Slovakia. Compulsory schooling had also been introduced for Ukrainian children in Slovakia. Education of Ukrainian children aimed to provide education equal to that of Slovak children. In 2023, 11,000 children were received from Ukraine with the majority being permitted to stay in Slovakia. Schools could create support teams to provide support activities.
Closing Remarks
VELINA TODOROVA, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, commended Slovakia for its efforts to pursue the implementation of the Convention. The Committee believed their concluding observations would be taken very seriously, particularly in the areas of multisectoral policies, child participation, deinstitutionalisation, education, and protection against discrimination. Ms. Todorova wished Slovakia every success in this endeavour.
PETER PAMULA, State Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic and head of the delegation, thanked the Committee for the open, constructive dialogue, which had helped identify further challenges to be tackled. Slovakia would adopt all measures to support deinstitutionalisation and alternative care, adopt further measures to support families, and increase the level of tolerance in society, so that differences were not a decisive factor.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CRC25.002E