Experts of the Committee on the Rights of the Child Praise Panama’s Child Protection Laws, Ask about Measures to Prevent Online Grooming of Children and Protect Migrant Children in the Darien Gap
The Committee on the Rights of the Child today concluded its consideration of the initial report of Panama under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Committee Experts praised the State’s child protection legislation and raised questions about measures addressing online grooming of children and protection of migrant children in the Darien Gap.
Bragi Gudbrandsson, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Panama, said the State party’s legislation on the protection of children and adolescents was thorough and would help the State party to move forward. However, there was a lack of legislation on grooming of children. Had the State party considered introducing legislation addressing online sexual exploitation and grooming of children?
Another Committee Expert said there seemed to be a focus on security rather than protection in the Darien region. This needed to change. How was the State party working to protect migrant children, who witnessed terrible things in the Darien Gap?
Introducing the report, Maria Inés Castillo, Minister of Social Development and head of the delegation, said the dialogue was an invaluable opportunity to enrich national policies and to continue to manage public policies based on the best interests of the child. The ratification of the Optional Protocol showed Panama's interest in preventing and prosecuting the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.
The delegation said that the law on sexual harassment of young people applied in cases of online grooming. Online grooming of children could be punished with up to 15 years imprisonment. The State party was carrying out an awareness raising campaign into safety online, promoting a society-wide approach to addressing the issue.
The State party placed a high priority on the protection of migrants, the delegation said. It was working with other countries in the region to safeguard the human rights of irregular migrants crossing through the Darien jungle.
Ms. Inés Castillo said that in 2019, the State party established an inter-institutional Protection Board dedicated to the care of unaccompanied migrant children. This Board had specialised staff who provided continuous care, facilitating the identification and transfer of children and adolescents to protection centres or foster families.
In closing remarks, Mr. Gudbrandsson said that the delegation had provided substantive answers to the Committee’s questions. He wished the State party well in its continued work to promote the rights of children.
In her concluding remarks, Ms. Inés Castillo said the dialogue had been beneficial in assessing the efforts made by Panama to strengthen the rights of children. The State party was determined to overcome the challenges it faced and guarantee the full enjoyment of the rights of children and adolescents.
Ann Marie Skelton, Committee Chair, said in concluding remarks that the Committee appreciated the depth that the delegation had gone into in the dialogue. It had demonstrated that there were many people in Panama who were committed to improving systems for children.
The delegation of Panama consisted of representatives from the Ministry of Social Development; Second Criminal Chamber; National Secretariat of Children, Adolescents and Family; Institutional Office against Trafficking in Persons; Department of Social Development and Human Rights; Senior Office; Section of Integral Health of Children and Adolescents; Department of International Affairs; Ministry of Education; National Migration Service; Public Prosecutor's Office; Supreme Court of Justice; National Assembly; and the Permanent Mission of Panama to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue the concluding observations on the report of Panama at the end of its ninety-sixth session on 24 May. 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 on Monday, 13 May at 3 p.m. to consider the combined fifth and sixth periodic report under the Convention of Egypt (CRC/C/EGY/5-6).
Report
The Committee has before it the initial report of Panama under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (CRC/C/OPSC/PAN/1).
Presentation of Report
MARIA INÉS CASTILLO, Minister of Social Development and head of the delegation, said the dialogue was an invaluable opportunity to enrich national policies, and to continue to manage public policies based on the best interests of the child. The ratification of the Optional Protocol showed Panama's interest in preventing and prosecuting the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.
Towards implementation of the Optional Protocol, Panama had adopted Law 79 of 2011 on Trafficking in Persons and Related Activities. The Law harmonised the legal framework on trafficking with international standards, and established an inter-institutional commission responsible for designing, executing and monitoring the National Plan against Trafficking in Persons and implementing measures to prevent, protect, and prosecute the crime. Awareness-raising campaigns, training programmes for public officials and victim assistance policies and services had been developed. In addition, numerous investigations and operations had been carried out, resulting in the dismantling of trafficking networks and the rescue of a considerable number of people in vulnerable situations.
Further, the State created Law 171 of 2020 on Comprehensive Protection of Early Childhood and Early Childhood Development, with the purpose of ensuring the well-being and optimal development of children from birth to eight years of age. The Law established a mechanism for complaints and rapid action through the relevant national institutions in situations of abuse. Panama had also enacted Law 285 of 2022, which instituted the System of Guarantees and Comprehensive Protection of the Rights of Children and Adolescents. The National Secretariat for Children, Adolescents and the Family offered a hotline providing support in cases of violations of the rights of children and adolescents. Between 2020 and 2022, this hotline has benefited 5,206 users and received an average of 372 calls per month.
Provincial and regional committees for care of children and adolescents had been established to address the problems of violence and child abuse in a coordinated manner. In 2019, the State party established an Observatory against the Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents, the mission of which was to monitor the national situation to inform and generate relevant documents on the subject, with the aim of creating greater awareness in Panamanian society. This Observatory had organised three Scientific Congresses to date and was in the process of preparing a fourth to promote research and the study of crimes related to this subject. As a result of the last Congress, 37 recommendations and 24 conclusions had been published aimed at strengthening the System of Guarantees and Comprehensive Protection, the Penal System and the Surveillance and Monitoring System.
The Tourism Authority of Panama had concluded the first version of a bill on ethics and conduct of the tourism sector to prevent crimes of sexual exploitation. It was expected to enter into force this year. This law would establish clear standards of conduct and responsibility for tourism companies and professionals; promote a culture of vigilance against this form of exploitation; and establish a more robust legal basis for the prosecution and punishment of sexual exploitation. Legislation on Crimes Against Trafficking in Persons also criminalised sexual exploitation.
The Public Prosecutor's Office had seven “Gesell Chambers” distributed nationwide. The primary objective of these facilities was to safeguard the confidentiality and integrity of victims, especially children and adolescents, preventing their re-victimization. In these spaces, psychological interviews and oral trial hearings were carried out. Training and workshops were being held with members of the judiciary to strengthen their capacities to attend to judicial protection proceedings. The judicial system was supported by various entities dedicated to safeguarding the rights of children and adolescents, including the Institute of Public Defence and the Department of Free Legal Advice. In addition, the institutional framework had been strengthened with the creation of new specialised courts and an Interdisciplinary Technical Unit in the jurisdiction of children and adolescents.
In 2019, the State party had established an inter-institutional Protection Board dedicated to the care of unaccompanied migrant children. This Board had specialised staff who provided continuous care, facilitating the identification and transfer of children and adolescents to protection centres or foster families. There was a manual of procedures for monitoring the quality of homes and temporary protection centres. Immunization activities, morbidity care and counselling had been carried out for families of migrant children. The State party had also implemented a Protocol for the Identification and Care of Refugee Children and Children in Need of International Protection. This protocol was based on the principle of non-refoulement and ensured that children seeking refugee status received protection and assistance necessary to fully exercise their rights. The State cooperated with various international agencies to safeguard children and adolescents who were part of migratory flows.
Panama reaffirmed its commitment to strengthening its institutional capacities, focusing on improving data collection and qualitative documentation. It resolutely upheld its commitment to international human rights standards and would continue to support multilateral initiatives to eradicate violence and all forms of discrimination against children and adolescents. It sought to build a future where every child could grow up in a safe and secure environment, where their rights were respected, and their voices were heard.
Questions by Committee Experts
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Panama, said that there were reports that there was a low number of investigations and prosecutions of crimes involving the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Only two per cent of the crimes against children investigated by the Prosecutor’s Office fell under this category. What steps could be taken to improve data collection on these crimes? Mr. Gudbrandsson applauded the establishment of the Sexual Exploitation Observatory within the University of Panama. Was the State party engaging with it to develop policies to prevent sexual violence and the offences covered by the Optional Protocol?
The State party’s legislation on the protection of children and adolescents was thorough and would help the State party to move forward. However, there was a lack of legislation on grooming of children. Had the State party considered introducing legislation addressing online sexual exploitation and grooming of children? It was important, however, not to criminalise consensual “sexting” between peers. The law on the national amber alert system for missing children was not operational. The State party needed to make efforts to operationalise this law.
Has the State party made progress on enacting the second National Plan for the Prevention and Elimination of Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescent for the period 2019–2025? Had it increased the participation of children and local communities in developing policies and plans? There was seemingly a lack of coordination between the State’s various entities. How was the State party addressing this issue?
Why was the National Intersectoral Committee for the Prevention of Violence against Children and Adolescents not operational? The National Multisectoral Strategy for the Prevention of Violence against Children 2018–2022 needed to be revised and renewed. Were there any plans to strengthen the multidisciplinary Unit for the Protection and Attention to Victims within the Public Prosecutor's Office by providing sufficient personnel to ensure adequate treatment and follow-up for the restitution of the rights and health of the victims? The Unit was reportedly unable to perform its duties.
What steps had been taken to raise awareness of the Optional Protocol? How was the State party ensuring that the media protected victims of violence and children’s right to privacy? How was the State party working with civil society to address Optional Protocol crimes? How would the State party strengthen the National Commission for the Prevention of Sexual Exploitation Crimes within the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which reportedly had limited protective powers.
What steps had been taken to protect the rights of vulnerable children at risk of falling victim to offences under the Optional Protocol, especially girls who were victims of domestic violence; migrants, asylum-seeking and refugee children, especially in the Darien jungle; indigenous children; children from rural areas; children in street situations; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex children; children living in poverty; children with disabilities and children in residential or foster care?
Another Committee Expert called on the State party to provide more data on areas related to implementation of the Optional Protocol. What were the minimum and maximum sentences issued for crimes of trafficking against minors? Abusers seemed to use loopholes to get around serving prison sentences. How was the State party addressing these loopholes? Did the State party have a law on adoption as a form of enforced disappearance? The State party had a draft bill on online sexual harassment. How was grooming criminalised in the draft bill? There had been a Presidential veto that had allowed for crimes to occur within the adoption system. What efforts was the State party making to ensure that crimes were punished?
How did the State party prevent re-victimisation of child victims in courts? There was seemingly a lack of trained staff who could conduct child-sensitive interviews. Panama was conducting many campaigns on human rights. Were any of these campaigns conducted online to prevent digital crimes?
What steps had been taken to raise the Ombudsperson to “A” status under the Paris Principles? How was the State party supporting the Ombudsperson’s activities under the Optional Protocol?
Had the State party assessed and revised the strategic plan on protecting the rights of migrants? The State party charged foreigners who exited Panama using airports a tax. How did the State party ensure that these funds were directly used to combat sexual exploitation?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said child victims of sexual violence were referred to necessary health services. The Government also carried out home visits to those children; over 7,000 follow-up visits had been held in 2023. Law 409 had entered into force this month. The law did not mention grooming but included provisions on the protection of spaces for children and punishments of persons who abused children in digital environments. An awareness raising campaign was in place to inform parents of the threats posed to children in online environments. Parental control mechanisms were being implemented in games and applications. Various workshops had been held with local communities and governments on the protection of children.
To support child victims of abuse, the State party had established authorities and protocols focusing on the best interests of the child. A protocol for interviewing victims of sexual violence had been developed, which ensured that interviews were conducted in private settings and that child victims did not come into contact with abusers. A national team comprising around 30 psychologists, 40 social workers and several legal specialists managed cases involving children referred to it by the Public Prosecutor’s Office. There were also frontline support units for migrants in the Darien Gap who had received training on protecting children’s rights.
The National Committee for Protecting against Sexual Exploitation Offences had worked to improve management of payments charged to foreigners exiting the country through airports. It was considering increasing the tax. The State party had improved data collection regarding the use of funds. The National Committee was setting up satellite offices and providing those offices with funds to carry out targeted actions. New campaigns were being carried out on cybercrime. One campaign held this year discouraged boys and girls from accessing the dark web.
Panama had a national strategy on the prevention of violence against children and had established the National Council for Childhood, which conducted consultations with children and other stakeholders. The State party was working to raise awareness of the law on early childhood, which encouraged a paradigm shift to a right-based approach. Law 285 addressed the role of the media in supporting children and promoting their rights. It ensured that media messaging that was damaging to children was prevented.
The law on the amber alert system had been implemented. It had had a positive effect, helping even yesterday to locate a missing girl. There was inter-sectoral cooperation with State agencies and the media to implement this legislation.
The Criminal Procedure Code regulated timeframes for court proceedings. It allowed the State party to significantly reduce timeframes for trials. The Code established a six-month term for investigation of cases, which could be extended to one year for complex cases. Judges provided oversight of the entire criminal procedure. The State party was working to further streamline cases to address the backlog of cases.
There were protocols for dealing with trafficking in persons to ensure that these cases were addressed in a timely fashion. The Brasilia Rules had been incorporated into criminal procedures to ensure that children’s rights were protected throughout criminal procedures. The budget for the Public Prosecutor’s Office had significantly increased recently. There was a specialised unit dealing with cases involving adolescents in conflict with the law.
Panama had made efforts to strengthen the availability of data. National census data was published online. Over the next few weeks, the State party would conduct a national survey on children with disabilities. This would help the State party to develop disability policies for children. The 2023 census provided data that was informing the development of children’s policies.
Panama had a national action plan on trafficking in persons. The State party worked to raise awareness of the crime, care for victims, prosecute the crime and conduct follow-up and monitoring work. The State party had identified five minor victims in 2022. The punishment for trafficking minors was 20 to 30 years imprisonment. Trafficking of minors and relatives were aggravating circumstances.
There was a teacher training programme that aimed to prevent violence in the public sphere against children and women. Days promoting zero tolerance for violence were celebrated by schools in the State; they had been held every year since 2018. There were education modules in schools on the dangers of cyber bullying and trafficking in persons. The human rights promotion module addressed prevention of violence, gender equity, sexual harassment and measures to combat trafficking in persons.
The draft bill amending the law on adoption had been vetoed by the President’s Office as it was felt that it needed to be improved. The draft was currently being updated and debated. Panama was conducting online awareness raising campaigns on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, positive parenting and prevention of online sexual violence and grooming. Calls to the psychological support line for children had increased in recent years thanks to these campaigns.
Questions by Committee Experts
One Committee Expert said that the situation in the Darien Gap was complex. There seemed to be a focus on security rather than protection in the region. This needed to change. How was the State party working to protect children who witnessed terrible things in the Darien Gap? What policy was the State party planning to hold to account transnational companies that facilitated violations of child rights?
Another Committee Expert asked how Panama was reforming its Criminal Code regarding criminal responsibility when sexual relations occurred between adolescents. How was it preventing frivolous complaints from being filed under this legislation? Was the State party optimising coordination of the State’s many agencies and allocating them resources?
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Panama, said that the State party had been discussing several bills aimed at improving the law on online sexual abuse. This indicated that the current legislation had shortcomings. Over 90 per cent of child sexual abuse material was self-generated. How did legislation address self-generated material and consensual “sexting”?
There was a lack of procedures for determining the best interests of the child related to crimes under the Optional Protocol. How was the State party addressing this? The Expert welcomed that the amber alert law was now operational. Was the Amber Alert Commission now functioning?
Around 30 per cent of the population of Panama were children, and around 40 per cent of children were in a state of poverty. How was the State party tackling child poverty? Were recordings of interviews with children used in court proceedings, or did children have to make statements in court after participating in interviews? How did the State party ensure that support for child offenders was multi-disciplinary?
Another Committee Expert congratulated the State party for the positive steps it had taken to implement the Optional Protocol. There were three different agencies involved in the protection of children with overlapping mandates. Was the State party working to make the mandates of these agencies clear and address overlaps?
One Committee Expert asked how child victims were being protected from reprisals. Were there capacity building efforts that targeted non-governmental organizations and civil society? How did the State party ensure that support payments made to child victims were not pocketed by parents? Were children allocated specialised lawyers?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that State legislation guaranteed the fundamental rights of children and promoted protection measures. Children were involved in decision-making processes involving matters affecting them. The State upheld the best interests of the child. The Ministry for Social Affairs’ Council for Childhood included representatives from civil society and academia. Each agency working on children’s rights had a clear sphere of responsibility.
Panama had a strategy to combat poverty in infants and very young children in 300 targeted areas of the country. The strategy had contributed to reducing multidimensional poverty by five per cent between 2018 and 2022.
The State party placed a high priority on the protection of migrants. It was working with other countries in the region to safeguard the human rights of irregular migrants crossing through the Darien jungle. The number of irregular migrants was growing exponentially year after year. The State party was addressing the issue as best it could.
Children who were not Panamanian nationals did not have irregular status in Panama. They had the same rights to protection as those of Panamanian children. Programmes for children developed by the State party benefitted all children on the State’s territory. Panama did not conflate security and protection. Children were not seen as threats. The State party was dealing with persons responsible for horrific crimes against migrant children. It was implementing measures to protect the rights of all migrant children and had invested significant State funds on these. Migrant children who wished to stay in Panama could file applications through a streamlined system that had been implemented since 2018. There were challenges in collecting data on migrant children. A digital database was being implemented to improve migrant tracing functions.
Sexual relations between children aged under 14 was not considered to be an offence. There were special proceedings for children aged 15 or 16 who had sexual relations with children under 14. Legislation was being reformed to adapt juvenile criminal proceedings to conform with the provisions of the Convention. There was a judicial branch established in Darien that was specialised in child protection cases. The branch included a child rights defender, a social worker and a psychologist. Child victims were deferred to health and care services as needed and investigations were conducted into violations of their rights. The branch supported the return of these children to their families.
Panama had a mechanism to prevent revictimization of minors in court proceedings. Prosecutors could request that minors were interviewed via video conference or other means to separate them from abusers. These interviews were used by the courts as evidence.
The law on sexual harassment of young people applied in cases of online grooming. Online grooming of children could be punished with up to 15 years imprisonment. Minor offenders were issued with reduced punishments compared to adults. The State party was carrying out an awareness raising campaign into safety online, promoting a society-wide approach to addressing the issue.
Panama was a signatory to 14 bilateral and multilateral treaties that allowed for cooperation in international criminal investigations, and even in the absence of such treaties, mutual legal assistance could still be provided. There were 19 active cases of cooperation with other States, including cases of trafficking, sexual abuse, rape and depravation of liberty.
Concluding Statements
BRAGI GUDBRANDSSON, Committee Expert and Coordinator of the Country Taskforce for Panama, said that the delegation had provided substantive answers to the Committee’s questions. He wished the State party well in its continued work to promote the rights of children.
MARIA INÉS CASTILLO, Minister of Social Development and head of the delegation, thanked the Committee Experts, who had asked very relevant questions. The delegation had presented Panama’s efforts to strengthen the rights of children. The dialogue had been beneficial in assessing the efforts made by the State in this regard. Panama was aware of the challenges it faced and was determined to overcome them and guarantee the full enjoyment of the rights of children and adolescents. The State party would continue to work with civil society in this regard. A dialogue with the Committee was a key step in building a nation where all citizens could enjoy their rights on equal footing.
ANN MARIE SKELTON, Committee Chair, said that the Committee appreciated the depth to which the State party had delved into the dialogue. The delegation had demonstrated that there were many people in Panama who were committed to improving systems for children.
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.
CRC24.014E