Experts of the Committee on the Rights of the Child Commend the Russian Federation on the Reduction in Child Mortality Rates, Ask about Propaganda in Schools and the Impact of the War in Ukraine on Children
The Committee on the Rights of the Child today concluded its consideration of the combined sixth and seventh periodic report of the Russian Federation, commending the State on reducing child mortality rates, while asking questions about propaganda in schools and the impact of the war in Ukraine on children.
A Committee Expert said the State party’s efforts to reduce child mortality should be recognised, as it was quite an effort, and had resulted in a significant reduction.
An Expert said information had been received that the Russian Federation was actively conducting propaganda and promoting political perspectives about armed conflicts in schools. The Movement of the First, which already had over one million members, was concerning. What was the purpose of this movement? Could the new module “Conversations about Important Things” be explained? Was the content of this module defined by the Government? Was it true that military training would return to Russian schools, and would this include weapons training?
Bragi Gudbrandsson, Committee Vice Chair and Country Taskforce Coordinator, said concerning violations in the context of the military invasion in Ukraine, since 24 February 2022, the killings of 302 boys and 243 girls had been verified, due to indiscriminate attacks on Ukraine. How did the State party justify these military actions in light of its obligations embodied in the Convention? How many Russian children had lost their fathers in the conflict? Another Committee Expert asked for more details on the safe return of Ukrainian children, either to Ukraine or a third country?
The delegation said teachers were not permitted to use their professional activity for political motivation, or to coerce pupils to take on a set of political views. This legal standard was complied with in Russia. The “Conversations about Important Things” module was an extra school activity. The lesson had no political slant, but rather sought to develop the attitude of the pupils towards Russia’s history, environment and culture. The Youth Movement, known as the Movement of the First, was created to support the education of children and their professional vocational guidance. The new subject would be introduced into the curriculum from 1 September 2024, and covered the basics of security and life activity, with expanded content. Anything connected with national defence was a key component of the module.
The delegation said there were no sufficient facts to confirm the number of children killed since February 2022. Right now, nobody could know the statistical data regarding children who had lost their parents or family members in the war. Since February 2022, the Russian Federation had not been involved in the deportation of citizens from Ukraine. About 4.8 million residents of Ukraine, including children, were accepted into the Russian Federation. Most children came with their families or guardians and were placed in temporary shelters or with relatives. The Ombudsman on the Rights of the Child had assisted in the return of 48 children to their families in Ukraine.
Introducing the report, Alexey Vovchenko, Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Protection of the Russian Federation and head of the delegation, said ensuring a safe and secure childhood in the Russian Federation was one of the most important areas of social policy and a high priority. An important aspect of the social policy of the Russian Federation was preventing child abandonment, and federal and regional interdepartmental actions plans had been implemented to achieve this goal. The plans had resulted in a decrease in the number of cases of deprivation of parental rights (by 2.2 per cent) and the removal of children from their parents in the event of a direct threat to their life and health (by 12.6 per cent). In 2022, 6.8 million children in the Russian Federation were enrolled in preschool education. Over five years, almost 789,000 new places in schools were put into operation, while 265,500 additional places were created in preschool educational organizations and more than 1,500 new kindergartens had been built.
In closing remarks, Mr. Gudbrandsson said he appreciated the opportunity to engage in the dialogue which had been interesting and informative. The country taskforce urged the State party to cease the military operations in Ukraine without delay, to avoid further devastating consequences for children in Ukraine, Russia and all over the world.
Mr. Vovchenko, in concluding remarks, thanked the Committee for the detailed questions. The State would be attentive to all the recommendations made by the Committee. However, the Russian Federation would not consider itself obliged to fulfil recommendations which were not aimed at fulfilling the rights of children in Russia, but were biased and sought to interfere in the affairs of the sovereign State.
The delegation of the Russian Federation consisted of representatives from the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection; the Ministry of Education; the Ministry of the Interior; the Ministry of Science and Higher Education; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Internal Affairs; the Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media; the Investigative Committee; the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs; the Prosecutor General’s Office; and the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue the concluding observations on the report of the Russian Federation at the end of its ninety-fifth session on 2 February. Those, and other documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, will be available on the session’s webpage. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 23 January, to begin its consideration of the combined fifth and sixth periodic report of Lithuania (CRC/C/LTU/5-6).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined sixth and seventh periodic report of the Russian Federation (CRC/C/RUS/6-7).
Presentation of Report
ALEXEY VOVCHENKO, Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Protection of the Russian Federation and head of the delegation, said ensuring a safe and secure childhood in the Russian Federation was one of the most important areas of social policy and a high priority. Over the past 10 years, several important State documents had been adopted in this area, including the Concept of State Family Policy, two plans for the implementation of the Decade of Childhood up to 2027, and the Strategy for Comprehensive Child Safety for the period up to 2030. Since 2020, the Constitution of the Russian Federation contained new amendments which protected the family, motherhood, fatherhood and childhood as one of the guarantees of the State. Against the backdrop of the pandemic, the volume of the children's budget had been increased. New measures were being introduced to support families with children, and social services and infrastructure were being developed in the interests of families with children.
An important aspect of the social policy of the Russian Federation was preventing child abandonment, and federal and regional interdepartmental actions plans had been implemented to achieve this goal. The plans had resulted in a decrease in the number of cases of deprivation of parental rights (by 2.2 per cent) and the removal of children from their parents in the event of a direct threat to their life and health (by 12.6 per cent). Over the past 10 years, the number of child orphans in State organizations had decreased by 66 per cent and the total number of child orphans had decreased by 24 per cent. The Government had drafted a bill that improved the system for the selection and preparing of citizens who wished to adopt a child.
One of the priorities of State policy was the protection of the health of children. In 2022, 10 regional centres for expanded neonatal screening were created, providing diagnoses for more than 40 congenital and hereditary diseases at the beginning of their development, making early treatment possible. Almost every child in the country was screened at an early stage. Particular attention was paid to the prevention of suicide among children, and a set of measures aimed at preventing this was being implemented up to 2025. One of the important tools was the children's helpline, which operated throughout the country, providing around-the-clock assistance in 79 regions. Since 2021, the Circle of Kindness Foundation had provided children who suffered from chronic health conditions with medicine, medical devices and rehabilitation, helping more than 23,000 children.
In 2022, 6.8 million children in the Russian Federation were enrolled in preschool education. Over five years, almost 789,000 new places in schools were put into operation, while 265,500 additional places were created in preschool educational organizations and more than 1,500 new kindergartens had been built. The number of students receiving inclusive education was increasing every year. In 2022, there were almost 542,000 such students, an increase of 7.5 per cent compared to 2021. Last year, amendments were made to expand education opportunities for children of the indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Russian Far East.
Due to the acceleration of the development of information technologies, issues related to children’s safety in the information space were highly topical. In 2023, the Concept of Children's Information Security was updated, which aimed at improving children's literacy, protecting them from destructive information and psychological influence, and ensuring the protection of children's personal data, among other things. Liability for forcing children to engage in sexual acts had also been strengthened. Since 2022, sexual assault against children aged 14 and over was punishable by life imprisonment. Concluding, Mr. Vovchenko emphasised that the legislative changes that had taken place since the last presentation of reports had been adopted with the active participation of civil society.
Questions by Committee Experts
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Vice Chair and Country Taskforce Coordinator, said the Committee would submit questions on the Ukraine situation at the end of the dialogue this afternoon in order to allow the delegation to prepare its responses for Tuesday morning. Did the Convention take precedence over national law? How were children able to participate in the process of law making? Were they consulted or given the opportunity to contribute to legislation? Since September 2022, the Russian Federation had ceased to be a member of the Council of Europe. Had the State introduced any decrees or laws to strengthen human rights, including child rights, to replace the legal protections previously enjoyed as a member of the Council of Europe? The framework for the Decade of Childhood until 2027 was welcomed. How did the regional plans of implementation reflect the rights of the child, as embodied in the Convention? How were different agencies involved in establishing and carrying out plans?
Was there a single executive body at the federal level responsible for the rights of the child? Could children themselves complain to the Human Rights Commission, or did their legal guardians need to submit such complaints? What was the contribution of the President’s Commission for Children’s Rights in protecting children’s rights in the Russian Federation? The Committee was concerned about the non-transparent procedure of appointing child rights commissioners in the Russian Federation; could light be shed on this matter? The Committee urged that the State repeal the act around civil society receiving aid from foreign sources. How could the State party justify this development, which had resulted in the liquidation of many civil society organizations and was contrary to the obligations of the Convention? Had Russia established a clear framework for industries operating in the State party to ensure they did not impact human rights?
Mr. Gudbrandsson said the Committee had received reports on the abuse and ill treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex children at the hands of law enforcement officers, and cruel and inhumane treatment of children in police operations, and in pre-trial detention and orphanages. What efforts had the Russian Federation taken to prevent the ill treatment of children by police officers and investigate any allegations? Had a complaints procedure for children been established? Had the State party considered adopting a national strategy to address violence against children?
Corporal punishment was still lawful in some settings in the Russian Federation and was supported by around one third of parents. Why had an explicit ban of corporal punishment not been enacted in all settings? Had the Russian Federation taken any efforts to reform investigations into child sexual abuse cases? Would legislation be introduced to ensure child victims of sexual abuse were prevented from revictimization, including that they not be subjected to traumatising cross examination in trials? Were mental health services available for child victims of abuse? There had been reports of institutionalised violence, including sexualised violence in the northern regions of Russia, as well as honour killings and bride kidnapping. Was the State party aware of these harmful practices and what measures were being taken to combat them?
A Committee Expert said the Committee had received numerous reports that provided evidence of stigmatisation of and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex children. There had been cases of children becoming suicidal due to bullying about their sexuality. What were the plans to criminalise hate crimes relating to sexual orientation and gender identity? Had authorities considered that the gay propaganda would have harmful effects on children? Did the State believe that it was healthy for children to live in a society which was polarised and hostile to certain groups?
Could more information be provided about the 55 multi-functional family centres? What kind of support and education on positive parenting was provided to parents? What measures were being taken by the Russian Federation to build the capacity of parents, extended families and legal guardians, in order to provide appropriate direction and guidance to children? What measures were being taken to ensure the effective monitoring of children in institutions, and for accessible channels of reporting for abuse? How were the quality services of children in institutions suffering from mental health conditions ensured?
Another Committee Expert asked what the situation was for Roma or refugee children born within the State territory; did they receive a birth certificate? Up to 1997, there was an entry in the passport showing indigenous origin, but since 2002 this was no longer recorded. This meant many indigenous children were not able to indicate their indigenous or ethnic origin, which was a problem. Was the delegation aware of this issue and how would it be resolved? Was there a protocol introduced to ensure that force was not used by police in peaceful demonstrations against children? How did the State protect children in the digital environment? Some teachers were using security breaches to monitor the access of students on social media networks; how was the privacy of these children being protected? TikTok, Twitter and Facebook were restricted in Russia; how was it ensured that children could interact and receive information from alternative sources?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Russian Federation had withdrawn from the Council of Europe last March. All rulings of the European Court were previously implemented by the Russian Federation and all compensations due were paid. The withdrawal from the Council of Europe did not adversely impact the human rights situation in Russia. Russia remained committed to its human rights obligations under many treaties to which it was a party. All the provisions of the Convention were implemented into national Russian legislation and were reflected in the Constitution. There was also a law on the rights of the child, which included all the provisions of the Convention. The Constitution established the supremacy of international laws over Russian legislation, should there be any discrepancy.
In each region, there were individual regional plans with detailed components of the federal plans. Children could participate in forming these regional plans, as could any citizen. There was no specific federal body within the Government which had the exclusive authority to respond to the provisions of the child. Instead, this responsibility was distributed across the federal level, across different ministries and sectors.
The initial goal of introducing the status of “foreign agents” was for the State to protect its sovereignty. Foreign agents conducted activities in areas which were of strategic importance to Russian society and State sovereignty, including collecting information on theRussian military which could be used against the State. The allocation of the status of “foreign agency” did not infringe on the rights of the subject and was not intended to form a negative reputation of a person, nor undermine trust. Regarding closing such agencies, the liquidation of any organization was not related to this status, but rather due to gross violations of the laws of the Russian Federation. The main reason for allocating the status of foreign agency was to inform the public; it was the same as marking a harmful product.
The criminal legislation in the Russian Federation had mechanisms to ensure punishment for crimes against minors, which were additional aggravating factors with a more serious punishment. In 2020, a federal prevention activity was initiated to protect children. There was an emergency hotline available 24 hours a day, seven days a week and an anonymous hotline, which children could call to report crimes. Due to the measures implemented in the last five years, there had been a reduction in the crimes against children. In 2018, the figures were around 11,000 crimes against children and these were now down to 8,000. A preventive register had been developed to list offenders who had committed crimes against children.
The Investigative Committee worked to investigate procedural verification on reporting crimes conducted by, and against minors, particularly serious crimes. To ensure the proper protection of the rights of child victims, there was mandatory participation by a psychologist and participation carried out with the child victim. The Investigative Committee was regulated by the Criminal Proceedings Code. The investigator could not do a cross examination and force an in-person meeting if there was no agreement by the minor victim or the legal representative. In December 2021, Russia stepped up the punishment for crimes against the sexual integrity of children to up to life imprisonment.
In the Russian Federation, there were 194 ethnic groups with equal rights, and the Constitution emphasised that the multi-ethnic people of Russia had the right to self-determination. The State attached great importance to protecting the rights of indigenous peoples and the Roma. The House of the Peoples was a collective body which worked together with national associations of Russian peoples to ensure that the ethnic variety of the country could be supported. Particular attention was given to upholding the languages of indigenous peoples, and significant financing was dedicated to this. There were around 6,000 children within nomadic families, and a series of nomadic schools had been established to educate these children. The majority of Roma received birth certificates for their children on an equal footing with other citizens of the Russian Federation. There had been a positive change. Since 2013, systematic work had been underway with an ethno-cultural plan for the Roma of Russia, which was reviewed in 2022. The plan covered education, social provisions and health.
Three million families received assistance last year, including financial assistance and food. In 2020, 3.9 million families had received assistance, showing a major reduction in two years. The comprehensive family service centres provided a multitude of services in one place, including resolving questions around education, health care and social rights. There were already 55 centres built in the region. One of the goals of the Russian Federation was to preserve traditional family values. Since last year, a project to prevent child abandonment had been implemented, with the goal being to support families through difficult times, and prevent infants from being placed in institutional care. There was a federal plan of measures in place, and the result had been a positive change amongst key parameters. The total number of orphan children had decreased by 11 per cent since 2019.
A great deal of attention was focused on protecting psychological health. Amendments had been made to legislation to improve the quality of healthcare for people with psychological complaints and ensure their rights were ensured in institutions. Starting in 2023, a broad network of psychologists had been formed, with the goal of making health care accessible. Working with parents was part of the comprehensive approach to help children with psychological complaints. If the person had the status of a refugee, asylum seeker or stateless person, they had a legalised right to declare a child’s birth and receive a birth certificate.
Under the Constitution, citizens had the right to meet and assemble peacefully. There was a federal law in place to implement this right. However, there was a difference between sanctioned and unsanctioned public meetings. A request needed to be made to the local municipal body and it had to be approved. If an event was not approved, it would be considered unsanctioned. Law enforcement officers had the right to deploy devices, including handcuffs, tear gas and water cannon, in cases where the participants of an event were threatening the security and safety of each other or those nearby. Under the law on protests, minors also had the right to participate in public events.
Everyone in the Russian Federation had the right to transmit information in all legal ways. The dissemination of information in Russia was governed by federal law. Censorship was only possible for information which was banned in the Russian Federation for all citizens. Digital security was primarily the responsibility of the parents. The State could provide sufficient tools for the information security of children to be maintained. All regions of the Russian Federation would adopt measures aimed at ensuring the digital security of children.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked what was being done to adapt institutions to the needs of the child with a human-rights based approach? How did the State plan to overcome the stigma of children with disabilities? There had been reports of cases of neglect of children in State institutions. Was the State aware of this? Had any actions been taken to punish the perpetrators and provide support to children? What measures could help address the plans for the prevention of suicide and ensure their proper implementation? What type of training was provided to mental health professionals?
The State party’s efforts to reduce child mortality should be recognised, as it was quite an effort, and had resulted in a significant reduction. There was good regulatory framework for access to abortion, but there was concern that there was pressure from the church to reduce availability in that area. What was being done to ensure there was no shrinkage of access to abortion services? Had comprehensive sexual education throughout the country been considered, particularly in rural communities? Did the State have plans to address the issue of housing for the Roma population? How was the State conducting its environmental monitoring and what were its risks to children? How were children being prepared to address the impacts of climate change?
Another Committee Expert said pre-primary education was almost 100 per cent. What percentage of pre-primary education was private? What was the Government’s policy on the wearing of the hijab in schools? Migrant children could access education but faced impediments in practice. Was the State aware of this problem and were steps being taken to make the process easier? Bullying appeared to be an issue in the Russian Federation; what steps were being taken to address this and promote safer schools?
Information had been received that the Russian Federation was actively conducting propaganda and promoting political perspectives about armed conflicts in schools. The ruling party had allegedly introduced special “hero” desks at schools which idolised war efforts. The Movement of the First, which already had over one million members, was concerning. What was the purpose of this movement? Was it true that a portion of the federal budget would be used to educate children on patriotism? Could the new module “Conversations about Important Things”, be explained? Was the content of this module defined by the Government? It was understood that attendance at these classes was obligatory, and children were punished for not attending. Was this the case? Could the Government provide perspective on the new textbook which rewrote history from an ideological perspective? Was it true that military training would return to Russian schools, and would this include weapons training?
What happened to unaccompanied children who were subject to deportation? What was the Government’s policy on the principle of non-refoulment? What methods were there to assist refugee children who did not speak Russian, to help them integrate into the school system? A report had been received regarding the dwindling of indigenous languages in schools. What was the Government’s policy to protect indigenous languages in schools? What was the position of 16- and 17-year-olds in the criminal justice system?
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Vice Chair and Country Taskforce Coordinator, said concerning violations in the context of the military invasion in Ukraine, since 24 February 2022, the killings of 302 boys and 243 girls had been verified, due to indiscriminate attacks on Ukraine. How did the State party justify these military actions in light of its obligations embodied in the Convention? What were the consequences of the military conflict on Russian children? How many Russian children had lost their fathers in the conflict. Was the State party aware of information about sexual violence perpetrated against children in Ukrainian villages and had any measures been taken to prevent this? The Committee had received information that Russian curricula was being enforced, as well as military training in schools in Ukrainian territories occupied by the Russian Federation. How could this be justified under the Convention?
A Committee Expert asked about measures to prevent the silencing of children in Crimea? Was there an official register for peaceful assemblies and protests? How many had been approved and sanctioned? What measures were being taken to restore access to instruction in Ukrainian language in the territories? Could the policy of the simplification of the naturalisation procedure be explained?
Another Committee Expert asked for more details on the safe return of Ukrainian children, either to Ukraine or a third country? What was the procedure for children who did not want to return to Ukrainian territory? How was the State addressing the situation of Ukrainian children who had been transferred to Russian institutions? Would the Russian Federation cooperate with the investigations of the International Criminal Court on the war crimes committed by President Putin and the Children’s Commissioner Maria Lvova-Belova?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said this was the third or fourth year that the Russian Federation had been implementing support centres for children with disabilities. There was broad coverage; the centres were active in 79 regions throughout the country. There were 123 boarding centres in the country, which supported children who were registered for medical support and assistance, including the administration of psychotropic substances. Only a doctor was permitted to prescribe psychotropic substances. Medical specialists, including psychiatrists and neurologists were on the staff. The State had launched the early assistance programme to avoid placing children with disabilities in such institutions at a later stage. New laws had also been adopted on comprehensive rehabilitation, stipulating new systems for children to live in private homes and apartments with support.
There had been a decrease in the deaths of children from HIV/AIDS by two thirds. The number of pregnant women with HIV had also seen a reduced trend. The coverage of drug therapy in the Russian Federation had grown from 80 per cent to 95 per cent in 2022. These were positive changes; the country was implementing a systematic approach to reduce the transmission rates of HIV/AIDS.
Contraceptives were provided free of charge and broadly distributed. There were no restrictions for women in Russia to receive legal medical abortions if required. The healthcare development strategy included a section on measures aimed at boosting access to medical and sanitary assistance in rural areas. Starting 2021, the State had taken major efforts to develop the primary healthcare network and modernise it. Mobile medical vehicles were also available with travelling teams to provide full medical services in remote areas.
A Presidential decree had approved a climate doctrine that took into account the long-term impacts of climate change, including on children. Given the size of the country, regional plans were harmonised, taking into account local climate zones and conditions.
The accessibility of kindergartens for children aged three to seven was approaching 100 per cent. The Constitution guaranteed access to free education; any child could be accepted into any school. Each school had a security service which ensured the perimeter was protected by video surveillance. The State had prepared mechanisms for action by staff and pupils if there was an attack which involved arms, explosives or hostage taking. Regular training sessions were carried out to ensure safety in schools. The Russian Federation sought to minimise bullying and had expanded psychological services within the education sector. The number of staff psychologists had increased by over 6,700 over the past five years, totalling more than 51,000 psychologists working in schools. Almost every school had one. Bullying was a separate module within the training of teachers in higher education.
Teachers were not permitted to use their professional activity for political motivation, or to coerce pupils to take on a set of political views. This legal standard was complied with in Russia. The Conversations about Important Things module was an extra school activity, which took place every Monday from 8:30am till 9:15am, at the same time, in every school in the country. This lesson had no political slant, but rather sought to develop the attitude of the pupils towards Russia’s history, environment and culture. Lessons covered topics such as Leningrad and tax literacy within the State.
The goal of the desk hero project was to educate students about former pupils at each school who had become part of the country’s history. The Youth Movement, known as the Movement of the First, was created to support the education of children and their professional vocational guidance. Creating an organization where children could meet and attend events together was fruitful in the context of educating the future generation. The new subject would be introduced into the curriculum from 1 September 2024, and covered the basics of security and life activity, with expanded content. The curriculum would not teach students to use lethal, military weapons. It would include studying the basics of protecting the motherland, informing the pupils about the armed forces of the Russian Federation, the various types of weaponry, and military service by conscription. Anything connected with national defence was a key component of the module. Entry and exit from cadet schools was voluntary.
In recent years, there had been a rise in the number of foreign children in the country, and often their knowledge of Russian was not at a level which allowed them to fully understand the school curriculum. This year, changes had been made to the federal State education standards and the federal education programme, to allow these children to overcome the gaps in their knowledge of Russian. The development of teaching in Ukrainian was seen in Crimea, where 92 schools had Ukrainian language as a native language, as well as Ukrainian literature. Seventy-four languages were taught within the school system, and over 3 million pupils studied native languages. In 2023, a centre for native languages was opened.
Russian legislation covered trafficking in children and exploitation, and law enforcement personnel were empowered to prevent these phenomena and provide support to victims. The Optional Protocol to the Convention on child prostitution and child pornography had been ratified. The Decade for Children had been established from 2018 to 2028.
Since February 2022, the Russian Federation had not been involved in the deportation of citizens from Ukraine. About 4.8 million residents of Ukraine, including children, had been accepted into the Russian Federation. Most children came with their families or guardians and were placed in temporary shelters or with relatives. The Ombudsman of the Rights of the Child had assisted in the return of 48 children to their families in Ukraine.
Under federal law, citizens, including minors, could submit communications on the violations of rights to the Ombudsman. In 2023 there were 100 minors who had sent complaints. Minors interacted with parliament and conducted their own work in youth parliaments. Under the Ombudsman, mechanisms were implemented to allow children to participate in decision-making where it concerned them. Ombudsmen from all regions met each year to discuss cases relating to the rights of the child. The Ombudsmen invited members of ministries to report on cases of the violations of rights to ensure that the Convention was fully implemented.
Questions by Committee Experts
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Vice Chair and Country Taskforce Coordinator, said answers had still not been provided regarding the military operation in Ukraine, which he hoped would be addressed at a later stage. Had the draft law on the Family Code been enacted? Concern had been raised about the child protection system, particularly investigation procedures. Could the role of the Investigative Committee be clarified? The revictimization of children throughout the system was concerning. Was there a discussion within Russia on addressing these issues?
A Committee Expert asked for a clarification on abortion. Russia had good legislation, but there was concern about social tensions and pressure from the Orthodox church. Was the State addressing this to ensure that access to abortion did not become more bureaucratic and cumbersome? Had the State investigated allegations of abuse against children with disabilities in boarding centres? Had the State considered the possible conflict of interest regarding the decree which permitted Ukrainian children to obtain Russian citizenship?
Another Expert asked about the practice in Crimea to transfer children from one place to another; could this be clarified? What were the correct numbers of children evacuated to the Russian Federation from the war zones?
A Committee Expert asked about the infection rate of HIV; could more precise figures be provided? What was the level of HIV infection in the country? What was being done for children who were AIDS orphans?
An Expert said the Committee was concerned about some practices in detention facilities holding children, including placing them in tiny punishment cells for up to seven days. What was the State’s plans to address this issue? Who monitored children’s rights when they were deprived of liberty? Was there a complaints mechanism available for children?
There was a reduction in the number of orphans in Russia, which was good news. How was this made possible? Was this done through adoption? How many children had become orphans because of the war in Ukraine? What was being done to support these children? The war against Ukraine had vast consequences on children in Russia, Ukraine and throughout the world. Was restoring peace one option being seriously considered by the State party for the sake of the millions of children suffering from the war?
A Committee Expert asked why fewer parents had lost their parental authority; what explained the reduction?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said there were no sufficient facts to confirm the number of children killed since February 2022. Right now, nobody knew the statistical data regarding children who had lost their parents or family members in the war.
The Investigative Committee was a system of bodies which investigated serious crimes committed against minors. Each investigation was conducted scrupulously. A special hotline was available for any child to call and inform that they were in danger. Duty officers were available 24/7 servicing that hotline. There were special child-friendly rooms for investigative discussions involving children to mitigate additional trauma for the child. Highly trained detectives with experience working with children were assigned to these cases. Everything possible was done to protect children during investigations.
Teachers at the boarding centres included psychologists, physical education instructors and vocational instructors, among others; they had qualifications and certifications to work with children. Every case of violence against children in these establishments was a tragedy and was scrupulously investigated.
Abortions were available for teenagers; there was no age restriction for medical abortions. If a child was under 15, consent was required from the legal representative and guardian. Psychological support was provided to teenagers prior to abortion. There were no restrictions which would create any hindrance for pregnant teenage girls to receiving legal medical abortions. The number of infants diagnosed with HIV/AIDS had fallen in the Russian Federation since 2016. Information and awareness raising campaigns were conducted regarding the transmission and spread of HIV/AIDS and to destigmatise people living with HIV/AIDS.
Regarding the acquisition of Russian citizenship for children from Ukraine, due to the new federal laws, the right to receive Russian citizenship was permitted to anyone who requested it. Anyone over the age of 14 could request this. Under the age of 14 this request was made by the legal guardian. This was not a mandatory procedure.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked what procedures had been instigated to bring perpetrators to justice, regarding abuses committed within the childcare system. Did these people still work with children? What was the comprehensive strategy? What treatment had been given to the child victims? Information had been provided to the Committee about a rise of 428.6 per cent of cases of abuse against children in orphanages. The Expert asked the delegation to shed light on this.
Another Expert asked if the Ombudsman’s Office had been given additional capacity to deal with cases of children coming from Ukraine? Was there a central place where enquiries were taken to? Was the family tracing mechanism also being dealt with under the Ombudsman’s Office?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said further time would be needed to provide answers and information regarding these questions. There were no statistics on children in Crimea. It was difficult to confirm if someone was taken from Crimea to another area. The State did not have disaggregated data on the regions and adoption. It was difficult to say how many children were transferred anywhere. The number of staff in the Ombudsman’s Office had not increased. There was no single body that made up the Ombudsman’s Office, it had regional presences.
The disciplinary cells for children were different from the ones for adults. Children were allowed to have brief meetings during the period under question, and could continue to study with their textbooks. They were also allowed up to two hours of physical activity per day. There was an independent national mechanism on monitoring places of detention, with officials who were permitted to visit all criminal punishment places, temporary holding cells and detention centres for minors, among others.
In primary school, children learnt the basics about the rights of the child, and in secondary school, they were taught about human rights instruments in more detail. The education system in Russia was fulfilling the provisions of the Convention. Russia was carrying out a preventative social programme for orphanhood and child abandonment. The support provided by the State, including psychological support, had borne some fruit, resulting in the reduction of the number of abandoned children. This had shown a positive statistical trend.
Concluding Remarks
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Vice Chair and Country Taskforce Coordinator, appreciated the opportunity to engage in the dialogue with the Russian Federation which had been interesting and informative. The State had clarified many concerns with articulated answers. The country taskforce urged the State party to cease the military operations in Ukraine without delay, to avoid further devastating consequences for children in Ukraine, Russia and all over the world.
ALEXEY VOVCHENKO, Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Protection of the Russian Federation and head of the delegation, thanked the Committee for the detailed questions. The rights of the child were a high priority for the State and the work of the Committee was greatly valued. The State would be attentive to all the recommendations made by the Committee. However, the Russian Federation would not consider itself obliged to fulfil recommendations which were not aimed at fulfilling the rights of children in Russia, but were biased and sought to interfere in the affairs of the sovereign State.
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.
______
CR.24.005E