COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD HOLDS INFORMAL MEETING WITH STATES TO DISCUSS NEW WORKING METHODS AND OTHER ISSUES

The Committee on the Rights of the Child held this morning an informal meeting with representatives of States to discuss new working methods, in particular the application of a simplified reporting procedure, as well as its activities under the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Benyam Dawit Mezmur, Chairperson of the Committee, welcomed the fact that many representatives of States were present at today’s meeting, which would be an opportunity to exchange ideas and share thoughts on what could be improved. The Committee on the Rights of the Child was the treaty body with the highest number of engagements by States. It had worked in double chambers during some of its sessions, which had allowed it to reduce the backlog of reports pending consideration.

Kirsten Sandberg, Rapporteur of the Committee, spoke about the simplified reporting procedure, which came out of the treaty body strengthening process. The Committee on the Rights of the Child had decided to propose at first that procedure to only a few States, as a pilot project that might take about three years. Questions would be submitted according to the clusters of the Convention, and States would be invited to comment on progress and challenges.

Hatem Kotrane, Member of the Committee, said that the main questions raised by the Committee under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography pertained to the distinction between trafficking in children and the sale of children, new technologies and threats they posed to children, criminal responsibility of moral persons, extraterritorial jurisdiction and the protection of victims. Under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict, the Committee had often raised States parties’ attention to the fact that the participation of children in armed conflicts did not necessarily involve their direct participation in hostilities. The recruitment of children by non-State actors unfortunately remained a matter of great concern for the Committee.

Sara Oviedo Fierro, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, said that four General Comments were currently being drafted by the Committee, respectively on public spending and the rights of the child, on the rights of adolescents to comprehensive development, on street children, and a joint General Comment with the Committee on Migrant Workers on the protection of migrant children.

In the ensuing discussion, States asked questions about the Committee’s working methods and expressed their views on dual chambers and the simplified reporting procedure. Some speakers noted that Committees should limit the number of questions asked to States, in order to allow them to provide better and more thorough answers. Many State representatives referred to the recently-adopted Guidelines against Intimidation or Reprisals, with some of them expressing concerns that those went beyond the mandate of the treaty body Chairpersons.

Speaking during the discussion were the following States: Slovenia, Ethiopia, Russian Federation, Pakistan, United Kingdom, Republic of Moldova, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Brazil, Egypt, United States, China, Zambia, Germany, Cuba, Iran and Spain.

The Committee will next meet in public on Friday, 29 January at 3 p.m., when it will close its seventy-first session.

Opening Remarks by the Chairperson of the Committee

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, welcomed the fact that many representatives of States were present today despite their busy schedules, which illustrated their strong interest in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the work of the Committee. The Convention on the Rights of the Child mentioned the word “States” more than one hundred times, because States were the main stakeholders. Today’s meeting would be an opportunity to exchange ideas and share thoughts on what could be improved.

The Committee on the Rights of the Child was the treaty body with the highest number of engagements by States. The ratification level of the Convention on the Rights of the Child stood today at 196 States parties, he said, the last ratifying State being Somalia. Even in the United States, which was the last remaining State that had not acceded to the Convention, there had been positive improvements, including the recent ban on solitary confinement for children. In addition, he said that as of today, 162 States had ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict, while 171 had acceded to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. The third Optional Protocol to the Convention on a communications procedure had so far received 24 ratifications.

Turning to methods of work, the Chairperson explained that the Committee had worked in double chambers during some of its sessions, in application of General Assembly resolution 68/268 on strengthening and enhancing the effective functioning of the human rights treaty body system, which had allowed it to reduce the backlog of reports pending consideration. The Chairperson’s meeting held in San José, Costa Rica, had led to the decision to provide more updates on the process of elaborating General Comments to States parties. Today’s meeting, he concluded, would focus on the development of the working methods of the Committee and the adoption of the simplified reporting procedure, before focusing on the work of the Committee under the first two Optional Protocols, followed by an opportunity for States parties to raise any other issue they might want to address.

Simplified Reporting Procedure

KIRSTEN SANDBERG, Rapporteur of the Committee, said that the simplified reporting procedure came out of the treaty body strengthening process. It involved the Committee issuing a list of questions to States parties before they submitted their report, which would then be based on answers to those questions. The Committee on the Rights of the Child had decided to wait before fully implementing that new procedure because of the extra work it required and the backlog of reports it had to address. The Committee would now start with proposing that procedure in a pilot project involving 10 States among those that had already provided a large number of reports, and the one State that had never provided any report. The whole process, from the issuance of the questions to the consideration of reports, might take about three years, she said. Questions would be divided according to clusters of the Convention. They would invite States to comment on progress and challenges. If that new procedure would lead to an increased backlog, then it would be of no use.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, invited States to comment on the simplified reporting procedure.

Slovenia said that its experience with the simplified reporting procedure had been a positive one so far, and it encouraged the Committee to propose that procedure as soon as possible.

Ethiopia commended the Committee’s efforts in reducing the backlog. The advanced questions sent to States parties would be based on information gathered from other stakeholders. That might lead the Committee’s work to be dictated by the views of those stakeholders, and this seemed to be discriminatory for other entities that had not been accredited or invited to provide input to the Committee.

Russian Federation said that it had agreed to the simplified reporting procedure for a dialogue with the Committee against Torture, but that had not been a positive experience. It was difficult for delegations to anticipate how dialogues with Committees were conducted when reporting for the first time. The simplified reporting procedure should therefore be proposed only to States that had already reported to a Committee. The number of questions was also an issue. The Russian Federation for example had to answer 70 questions by the Committee against Torture in less than 20 pages. Further, States parties might have difficulties in answering the questions on time.

Pakistan supported the point raised by the Russian Federation that the number of questions submitted to State parties should be realistic, in order to ensure that States had enough room to respond in a substantive way. On the contribution by other United Nations agencies and civil society organizations, Pakistan asked whether the Committee would transmit those inputs to the concerned State party.

United Kingdom reiterated its support to the simplified reporting procedure, and welcomed that it was now under active consideration by the Committee. That procedure would improve dialogues between the Committee and States parties. It welcomed that the Committee would seek information from the United Nations Children’s Fund and other stakeholders in elaborating lists of questions.

Republic of Moldova encouraged the full implementation of the provisions of General Assembly resolution 68/268. It also encouraged efforts to reduce the backlog through working in double chambers, and strongly supported the implementation of a simplified reporting procedure. The Republic of Moldova asked whether the Committee would still provide a list of issues prior to reporting after the simplified reporting procedure was in place.

Venezuela expressed support to what had been said by the Russian Federation and Pakistan. The simplified reporting procedure should be implemented in the smoothest possible way, and the number of issues raised to State parties had to be limited in order to allow for appropriate and timely responses. Countries that had not yet submitted their first periodic reports should not be asked to use that procedure.

Costa Rica underlined the importance of coordination among the different treaty bodies. It also stressed the importance of clear and concise recommendations in order to better ensure their implementation and assessment. Costa Rica called for strengthened technical and logistical support to States for the implementation of recommendations.

Brazil called for the creation of a forum or a platform that would allow States to share good practices on reporting to treaty bodies. Brazil then said it was important to provide States with sufficient time to provide adequate answers.

Egypt said that meeting in dual chambers during some sessions had led to differences between how States were considered, as some States were reviewed in front of the full Committee while others were reviewed by half of the Experts only.

KIRSTEN SANDBERG, Rapporteur of the Committee, said that the Committee would consider not offering the simplified reporting procedure to countries that had never reported before. The simplified reporting procedure would give States parties an opportunity to include their own comments and observations. The Committee was aware of the need to limit the number of questions raised in the context of that procedure. Regarding inputs, the Committee gathered its information from many sources, including other treaty bodies. The Committee also intended to use material from regional institutions.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, noted that the simplified reporting procedure was optional, meaning that States parties had the liberty to refuse it. That procedure, he believed, would reduce the burden on States parties, including those that had not yet submitted a report, as it provided guidance on issues and matters of concern for the Committee. Continuing, the Chairperson said that the Committee made judgment calls on what information to use and not to use. He said it was important to give States parties an opportunity to react to credible information from other stakeholders. The lists of issues received by States parties would however not indicate the source of information. The Committee had agreed to work in dual chambers with a view to reducing the backlog. It would decide within the current session whether that practice should continue for 2016.

RENATE WINTER, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, said that the main source of information was the previous recommendations made by the Committee.

IBRAHIM SALAMA, Director of the Human Rights Treaties Division at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that the issue of capacity building was central in resolution 68/268. The Office of the High Commissioner had strengthened its capacity in that regard, and had engaged in training activities. The Director encouraged States to establish a permanent national reporting mechanism that would have the expertise to coordinate reporting obligations by States parties.

Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child

HATEM KOTRANE, Member of the Committee, moving to the second agenda item, said that the Committee had adopted guidelines to help States parties to report under the two first Optional Protocols.

Regarding the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, he said that the Committee had adopted guidelines with eight sections, covering the major themes under that Protocol. During interactive dialogues, the Experts often had to remind States that the Protocol required States to criminalize the crimes covered by it. Difficulties had arisen regarding the confusion between trafficking in children and the sale of children. Often, the Committee had to remind States parties that trafficking involved the displacement of a child, whereas the sale of children could take place without such displacement. Difficulties had also resulted from the development of new technologies and the threats they posed to children. Other recurrent questions and concerns raised by the Committee pertained to the criminal responsibility of moral persons, to extraterritorial jurisdiction and to the protection of victims.

Turning to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict, the Committee had often raised the attention of States parties to the fact that the participation of children in armed conflicts did not necessarily involve their direct participation in hostilities. The recruitment of children by non-State actors unfortunately remained a matter of great concern for the Committee.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, noted that there was a long backlog of reports that were due but that had not yet been submitted under those two Optional Protocols.

United States appreciated the work of the Committee in promoting the work of children. As a general rule, the United States believed that the treaty body system played a critical role in promoting human rights and accountability. The United States underlined also the key role played by civil society organizations, and condemned acts of reprisals against them. The United States had submitted its reports under both Optional Protocols just last week.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, said that the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict was not relevant just for countries that were in conflict situations, but was much broader in terms of protection. He then underlined the importance of ratifying the two Optional Protocols.

Other Matters

SARA OVIEDO FIERRO, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, underlined the importance of General Comments enacted by the Committee. Four General Comments were currently being drafted. A General Comment on public spending and the rights of the child would clarify States’ obligations in relation to public expenditure and child-related issues. The Committee had had consultations with a broad range of stakeholders specialized in public spending, including the World Bank and non-governmental organizations. The second General Comment pertained to the rights of adolescents to comprehensive development. The Committee had received many contributions, and held consultations with adolescents from three continents. A General Comment on street children sought to identify the root causes of that phenomenon and to provide guidance for States to adopt a holistic approach to that issue. The last General Comment was being drafted jointly with the Committee on Migrant Workers, and would support States in adopting public policies for the protection of migrant children. The first three General Comments would certainly be adopted in 2016. The Vice-Chairperson then said that the Committee would need to revise some of its past General Comments.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, said that a good portion of the Committee’s work on General Comments was done outside of its meeting time. The Committee was therefore often obliged to request additional funds to elaborate them. General Comments were important to improve the understanding of the implications of the Convention on the ground.

China expressed serious concerns regarding the so-called Guidelines against Intimidation or Reprisals – or San José Guidelines - adopted during the last meeting of Chairpersons. Those Guidelines indeed went beyond the mandate of the Chairpersons meeting. They were drafted without transparency or consultation with States parties. Further, they imposed new obligations on States to recognize the authority of focal points on reprisals.

Costa Rica expressed support for the proposal by Brazil to facilitate the exchange of good practices among States parties.

Zambia welcomed the work undertaken by the Committee, and encouraged better communication between its secretariat and States parties. It encouraged the Committee to provide States with its lists of questions in good time prior to their consideration.

Slovenia asked for information regarding the adoption of a General Comment on children’s rights and the environment.

Germany asked what was the state of ratification of the third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure, and whether any individual complaint had been received by the Committee so far.

Cuba said it was very important to ensure an appropriate and realistic level of questions raised by the Committee during the interactive dialogue. Cuba echoed concerns raised earlier by China on the San José Guidelines, and noted that that meeting with civil society organizations could raise suspicions regarding the independence of the Experts.

Iran said it had submitted its report to the Committee a couple of weeks before. Referring to the so-called Guidelines against Intimidation or Reprisals, Iran believed that such guidelines had to be drafted with transparency and the full involvement of States parties.

Russian Federation asked why the Committee was looking for additional financing for the elaboration of the General Comment on migrant children. After noting that Chairpersons had drafted the San José Guidelines and imposed them upon the Committees, the Russian Federation asked whether it was fair that Committee Members had not been involved or given an opportunity to vote.

Venezuela shared concerns expressed on the San José Guidelines, which went beyond the mandate of the Chairpersons and had not taken States parties’ views into account. It also expressed concerns relating to the time given to States to reply to questions raised by the Experts during interactive dialogues. Also, interactive dialogues should reflect more the positive steps taken by States regarding the implementation of the Convention.

Spain said that it was currently finalizing its report, and would soon present it to non-governmental organizations before submitting it. It expressed concerns regarding the use of double chambers and was pleased to hear that the Committee would review it. Spain encouraged the Committee to continue using civil society as one of its main sources of information, and expressed support for the San José Guidelines.

Republic of Moldova asked whether the Committee had decided what would be the theme of the 2016 Day of General Discussion.

United States expressed concerns about acts of reprisals and asked what were the Committee’s views regarding the San José Guidelines.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, said that the 2016 Day of General Discussion would focus on the rights of the child and the environment. There was no General Comment on that issue being worked on. Responding to the question by the Russian Federation, he said that additional funding for the elaboration of General Comments was required for consultations and interpretation during the weekends.

RENATE WINTER, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, said she was the Committee’s focal point on reprisals. She said she would get in contact with focal points from the other Committees to share perspectives on the San José Guidelines and develop a common structure for their implementation. The Committee on the Rights of the Child did not have many problems with reprisals, she said, as children’s rights were not so controversial. Only one case had been referred to the Committee so far. In response to concerns raised by the Russian Federation, she said that the Chairperson had never imposed anything on Members of the Committee. The Committee was working through working groups that discussed issues and proposed actions in plenary. With regard to the third Optional Protocol to the Convention on a communications procedure, Ms. Winter said that focal points for individual communications from all treaty bodies would gather to align their methods of work.

A Committee Member said that Experts were also suffering from a lack of time. If States parties addressed previous recommendations made by the Committee, reviews would be made easier. It would also leave room for the Committee to address the issue of the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals that pertained to children’s rights.

SARA OVIEDO FIERRO, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, welcomed the idea of a forum formulated by Brazil, which would allow States parties to share good practices on the implementation of recommendations.

KIRSTEN SANDBERG, Rapporteur of the Committee, said the Day of General Discussion on children’s rights and the environment would be held in September 2016. There would be no General Comment on that issue.

With regards to double chambers, an Expert said there seemed to be a misconception. Concluding observations might be drafted in double chambers, but they were debated and adopted in plenary by all Experts. Another Expert said that double chambers had led to an increased workload for Committee Members.

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, said that the Committee had made progress internally in terms of management of time, including by limiting the interventions of Committee Members. The simplified reporting procedure could lead to better focused interactive dialogues. With regard to the third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure, he encouraged States to share good practices and promote further ratification at the regional level. Turning to the San José Guidelines, he said that those Guidelines could not be implemented without the involvement of States in terms of prevention and awareness-raising. General Assembly resolution 68/268 was the basis for those Guidelines. Other Committee Members had had a chance to discuss a draft version of the Guidelines prior to their adoption.


Concluding Remarks

BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Chairperson of the Committee, said that the high number of delegations present today was a reminder that the engagement of States was critical to the functioning of the Committee and the protection of the rights of the child. The simplified reporting procedure was again optional; the Committee would experiment on it, and keep States parties updated on the process of its implementation. He then encouraged States to take advantage of the United Nations Children’s Fund’s expertise when drafting reports.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CRC16/017E