COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD CONSIDERS REPORT OF ALGERIA UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL ON THE INVOLVEMENT OF CHILDREN IN ARMED CONFLICT
The Committee on the Rights of the Child this morning considered the initial report of Algeria on its implementation of the provisions of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict.
Presenting the report, Toufik Djouama, Charge d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, informed that since the submission of the report in 2015, tremendous progress had been made. Algeria placed great importance on the promotion and protection on children, and in this regard, it had ratified numerous international and regional legal instruments. These included the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1992; the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography in 2006; the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict in 2009; International Labour Convention 182 on the elimination of the worst forms of child labour in 2000; the African Charter on Human Rights and People’s Rights in 2008; and the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children in 2003. The full range of the provisions of these international and regional instruments were a full part of the country’s legal arsenal to ensure the promotion and protection of children.
In the ensuing discussion, Committee Experts expressed concern about the recruitment of children under the age of 18 in armed groups. In relation to this, they were seriously concerned that there was no specific provision in the Criminal Code prohibiting the recruitment of children by armed groups, and requested that the State party make an effort to ensure this specific legal provision. In relation to this, Experts also inquired about voluntary civil defence groups and whether there was any body that ensured children were not recruited in these bodies and in armed groups. Experts asked a series of questions regarding the military cadet schools, including whether children were asked consent prior to enrolment, whether they could leave without any kind of penalty, whether there were any complaints mechanisms therein, and whether girls attended these schools. More information was requested on data on the protection of children, as well as on refugee and migrant children, including the refugee children in Western Sahara and the Tindouf Refugee Camps. Regarding the National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children, Experts were concerned that children were not aware of how and where to file complaints, and that there may be confusion as to which body – the Ombudsman or the National Body - was competent for receiving complaints. Finally, Experts reminded of the importance of signing the Safe Schools Declaration, ratifying the Optional Protocol on a complaints mechanism, and the importance of following up on the Global Study for the Protection of Children.
In concluding remarks, Bernard Gastaud, Committee Expert and Rapporteur on Algeria, thanked the delegation for taking part in this fruitful dialogue, but noted that the Optional Protocol had not yet been fully applied neither administratively, nor technically, nor legally in Algeria. He invited the State party to ensure the full and complete implementation thereof.
Mr. Djouama, in concluding remarks, thanked the Committee for the very fruitful exchange of information, and reaffirmed the full, unswerving commitment of Algeria to the implementation of the Protocol and to all other international instruments that Algeria had ratified pertaining to the protection of the rights of children.
Olga Khazova, Committee Vice Chairperson, in conclusion, thanked the delegation and wished them a safe return. She hoped that the children of Algeria would never have to deal with armed conflict.
The delegation of Algeria included representatives of the Ministry of National Defence, and the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will next meet in public on Friday, 18 May at 10 a.m. to consider the combined second and third periodic report of Montenegro (CRC/MNE/2-3).
Report
The Committee is considering the initial periodic report of Algeria on its implementation of the provisions of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict (CRC/C/OPAC/DZA/1).
Presentation of the Report
Toufik Djouama, Charge d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, informed that the report had been drafted by an interdisciplinary working group, including the National Human Rights Institution and civil society. Since the submission of the report in 2015, tremendous progress had been made. In February 2016 the Constitution had been revised, with significant innovations in the field of the promotion and protection of human rights. The National Human Rights Council had been established in March 2017, comprising mostly of civil society members, and observing the principle of parity. This body had a mandate to conduct early warning, surveillance, assessment and awareness raising on human rights. In the past three years, Algeria had submitted several periodic reports to the United Nations human rights mechanisms, while since 2010 it had extended 14 invitations to Special Procedure mandate holders of which five visits had already been conducted. Algeria had also ratified in 2016 the Maputo Protocol concerning women’s rights in Africa as well as the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance.
Algeria placed great importance on the promotion and protection on children, and in this regard, it had ratified numerous international and regional legal instruments. These included the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1992; the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography in 2006; the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict in 2009; International Labour Convention 182 on the elimination of the worst forms of child labour in 2000; the African Charter on Human Rights and People’s Rights in 2008; and the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children in 2003. The full range of provisions provided by these international and regional instruments were a full part of the country’s legal arsenal to ensure the promotion and protection of children. With regard to children in armed conflict, the ratification of the Optional Protocol had not required any harmonization with the current domestic legislation, thanks to the fact that the national legislation already prohibited the enrolment or participation of children and minors in the armed forces. In 2016, article 72 of the Constitution had reaffirmed the engagement of the State party in the promotion of children’s rights.
For several years, Algeria had actively been engaged in a laborious process of consolidating the legislation pertaining to child protection. This process had culminated with the adoption of the Child Protection Act in 2015, which had been subject to broad prior consultation with various stakeholders who worked with children, including religious experts, journalists, psychologists, teachers, doctors, and lawyers. This legal framework had set up a National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children which had the mandate to design programmes, plans and strategies, and ensured the enjoyment of all children’s rights under the Convention and all other international instruments.
Algerian law prohibited the recruitment of children into the National People’s Army below 19 years of age. The military academy for cadets was a public establishment and fell under the aegis of the Ministry of Defence. Minimum age for admission thereto was at 12 for middle school and 16 for secondary school. It provided general schooling in line with the curricula set by the Ministry of Education and issued a middle school or baccalaureate diploma. The contract for attending the military cadet schools was signed by the legal guardian of the child. Cadets did not have any military status and the pupils were not subject to military law or training. They did not handle weapons. They had the same holidays as pupils attending regular schools.
Children who were victims of terrorism during the national tragedies in the 1990s benefited from psychological support, including rehabilitation, education and reintegration. In conclusion, Mr. Djouama reiterated Algeria’s unreserved commitment to the promotion and protection of all human rights. He assured the Committee that the delegation stood ready to provide any additional information requested.
Questions by the Committee Experts
Suzanne Aho Assouma, Committee Expert and Rapporteur on Algeria, asked what measures had been undertaken to ensure that no children under the age of 18 were recruited in the armed forces. What happened to children who already had a baccalaureate diploma at the age of 15 or 16? Did they immediately enter the military academy?
Was the signature of parents required for enlistment in the military cadet schools? Were children informed of the contents of the contract for entering the military cadet school? Were they required to give their consent? Once they entered the military cadet school, could they leave without any kind of penalty? Were there guarantees and safeguards provided to the child attending military cadet schools? According to the report, of the 10 such schools, only one could be attended by girls. What was the number of children attending these schools? If these were not trained on how to handle weapons, was this not a problem, especially if after graduating, they could be recruited as non-commissioned officers? Were there complaints mechanisms available for pupils attending these schools? Were the schools monitored to ensure that no underage children were recruited? What was the impact of the civil defence schools on children? Could the baccalaureate be obtained at 17 or under? Was there a definitive prohibition of recruitment of children under 18?
Allegedly, the voluntary civil defence groups were equipped and armed by the State in conjunction with the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Interior. Were children allowed to use weapons in this context? How could the State be sure that the minimum age of 18 was respected during recruitment?
Congratulating Algeria on its participation in all the conferences on the Guidelines on Protecting Schools and Universities from Military Use during Armed Conflict, the Expert regretted that the State party had not taken a clear position on this issue and had not signed the Safe Schools Declaration. The Expert requested more details on this matter.
Were children who were demobilized and who had been victims of armed conflict protected from reprisals? Were there properly trained medical staff who specialised in the care of these children? What care was provided to girls who had suffered abuse?
The Expert inquired about the whereabouts and situation of the 22 Syrian children refugees, and the 1,500 migrants from Niger that had arrived in Algeria and then been returned.
BERNARD GASTAUD, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Algeria, asked whether the State party had considered accession to the third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure.
The Expert lamented that while certain provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child had been transposed in the Algerian legislation, this was not the case of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict.
Who were the civil society representatives who had been involved in the drafting of the report?
No information had been received by the Committee regarding coordination of the implementation of the Protocol.
Was the National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children responsible for complaints, and if so, how did it do its work? Which body could receive complaints and under which legal provision? How many complaints from children had been received thus far?
The Expert lamented that there was very little information on data on protection. Did the information that was already available include children asylum seekers and children at risk on the borders?
Had an analysis been conducted on the results from the awareness-building courses?
Regarding legislation concerning offenses defined under the Optional Protocol, it did not seem that the Algerian Criminal Code defined the recruitment of children under the age of 18 in the security companies and armed forces as a criminal offence.
How were territorial competence and the principle of double criminality on extradition regulated in Algerian jurisdiction?
Finally, noting that Algeria had imported a large quantity of arms, the Expert inquired whether the State party had also exported arms.
Replies by the Delegation
The delegation confirmed that Algeria had been involved in all conferences on the Guidelines on Protecting Schools and Universities from Military Use during Armed Conflict, and the Safe Schools Declaration. It regretted, however, that the amendments to the text that Algeria had submitted had not been taken into account. Furthermore, there were two different texts – one was the Guidelines and the other was the Declaration. Algeria had been aligned with the Guidelines, even though the final text went beyond the initial proposal.
Schools were never used for military purposes. The National People’s Army had its own infrastructure for military purposes.
On the rehabilitation of children victims of terrorism, children who were victims of the national tragedies had received care and support by different State entities. Expert opinions on the care to be provided to these children were ensured by psychologists, doctors and psychiatrists.
The process of national reconciliation had allowed various segments of society to live in peace and harmony.
Algeria had always been a host country for refugees and had always been sensitive to this issue. Refugees had access to free schooling and health care under the same conditions as Algerian children. In reference to the question on the education of Syrian refugees, the delegation informed that Algeria did not require a document attesting to the level of education attained by the child. There merely needed to be a declaration by the interested party concerning the level of education obtained.
Regarding migrant workers, Algeria had for many years received significant migrants and thus required international cooperation. Algeria had reached an agreement with Niger on the return of its migrants. These vulnerable people, victims of various scourges, had been provided with all necessary means to facilitate their return to their country of origin.
The process of ratification of the third Optional Protocol of the Convention on an individual complaints mechanism was under way. Algeria’s protection of children knew no limitations.
The 2015 Framework Law on Children transposing the Optional Protocols defined children in danger. Children who were victims of armed conflicts or any other disturbance or insecurity were considered children in danger. This was a concept that encompassed the victims of armed conflict. This law attached considerable importance on children in danger through means of protection and awareness raising activities.
Regarding civil society participation in the drafting of the report, organizations that were heavily involved in the protection and promotion of children, such as NADA, were also heavily involved in the drafting the report.
The National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children had been established with the 2015 Framework Law on Children, with a view to monitoring all children’s rights, including awareness raising, morality education, living conditions, health, security and any behaviour that may subject children to danger. One of its prerogatives was to promote cooperation with specialised national, regional and international entities and agencies working in the field of the protection of children’s lives. It was also tasked with collecting data on children. The Standing Coordination Committee had become operational in March 2016. The National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children was tasked with a Plan of Action and had set up a hotline for receiving complaints on the infringement of children’s rights. It had also set up a monitoring unit at the headquarters. The 2015 Act also ensured services that provided support to children, and could facilitate and receive the lodging of complaints at the national or local levels. This did not preclude the National Human Rights Institution from receiving complaints as well. It was the Ministry of Justice which had the mandate to order the prosecution service to conduct inquiries or initiate legal proceedings.
On compulsory requirements in the military service, several legislative texts limited the minimum age for any recruitment to either 18 or 19.
The Law of 2008 stipulated that the military cadet schools be provided paramilitary training. This meant that cadets engaged in sports exercises of a physical nature. The legal guardian could at any time make a request for the cadet to leave the school. Once the cadet had earned his baccalaureate, he could continue training, or could study at the university under the guidance of the Ministry of Defence. All of the cadet schools in Algeria were in the main cities.
On the recruitment of those who had received their baccalaureate at the age of 16, the delegation said the admission to cadet school was at 12. At 16, the cadet would conclude his studies and would then be guided towards an appropriate university. Once completing the military cadet school, he would be 18. Thus, the cadet could enter military school once he/she had become an adult. Use of military weapons was not part of the curricula for cadets.
The law strictly prohibited the detention of a child under the age of 13 during the course of an investigation. Between ages of 13 and 16, a child could not be arrested. Children who were under criminal investigation were treated differently than adults.
On extradition and double criminality, if Algeria had an extradition agreement with a country, then anyone who was accused of a crime and convicted in another country would not be punished again in Algeria.
As to a question on whether Algeria exported arms, the answer was no, Algeria did not export arms.
Questions by the Committee Experts
An Expert lamented that the law did not go further on the independence of the National Child Protection Ombudsman. Was he independent and who was the person who occupied this post? Had children filed complaints to the Ombudsman? Had they been received, and if so, by whom? Was the Ombudsman truly independent from the authorities?
What was the country doing regarding the concern that minors under 16 could be detained under suspicion of terrorism? Was there a provision in the Criminal Code making the recruitment of children in armed conflict or terrorist activities a criminal offence?
Another Expert asked whether any solution been found for the refugee children in Western Sahara and in the Tindouf Refugee Camps.
What was the extent to which the article in the Constitution pertaining to the protection of children was applied?
Was the principle of non-refoulement fully respected?
Another Expert asked whether illegitimate children were at greater risk of being enrolled in armed groups.
An Expert asked the delegation to submit data on the protection of children at risk within the 48-hour period.
How did children know to which body they were supposed to send their complaints? Wasn’t there a lack of clarity and room for confusion if there were two bodies?
Another Expert asked whether the delegation was aware of the Global Study on the Protection of Children and whether it was being given enough attention. She informed that the intention of this initiative was to have an accurate figure of the number of children under detention by June 26 this year. The Expert urged the delegation to ensure that this study was being followed-up on.
Replies by the Delegation
On the independence of the National Ombudsman, the delegation replied that the institution had its own budget and financial autonomy. The budget was directly allocated from the State budget – it was not part of a Ministerial or departmental budget.
On the refugee children in Western Sahara and in the Tindouf Refugee Camps, this 40-year situation had been addressed by a Security Council resolution with a view to a definitive resolution of the conflict. Algeria hoped that the conflict would allow the Sahraouian people to enjoy their right to self-determination, and that the refugees could found their own country. Currently they were being cared for by the United Nations humanitarian agencies. In this regard, Mr. Djouama informed that there was a drop in humanitarian aid, causing suffering, and he took this opportunity to make an appeal for humanitarian aid to be supplied to these refugees.
On the implementation of the 2015 Act, a decree had been launched setting the operating methods of organisation of the National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children.
As to the questions on the dissemination of human rights information, all soldiers received training on human rights.
Referring to the question on the principle of non-refoulement, the delegation replied that the situation discussed was not a matter of refoulement but rather repatriation efforts conducted in close cooperation and agreement with the countries of origin.
A National Strategy to Fight Radicalism had been launched, one of the aims of which was to isolate terrorists.
Data collection had still not been undertaken because the National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children had only recently been established.
While the National Human Rights Institution was competent to receive general human rights complaints, it also received complaints in the area of children’s rights. The National Body for Promoting and Protecting Children was specifically designed for the protection of children’s rights and received complaints from or pertaining to children. The receipt of complaints by both bodies was possible and this did not pose any problems.
Questions by the Committee Experts
Did Algeria plan to accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court?
BERNARD GASTAUD, Committee Expert and Rappoteur on Algeria, was of the opinion that article 303 of the Criminal Code did not specifically criminalise the recruitment of children. Could the recruitment of children by armed groups be specifically defined as a criminal offence in the Criminal Code?
What was the supervisory body that ensured there were no children in the armed groups?
Replies by the Delegation
The delegation said the Rome Statute had not been ratified by Algeria. Referring to the current debate on this issue, the delegation informed that the position of Algeria was aligned with the African Union decision on this matter. Many African countries were of the opinion that a discriminatory approach was being undertaken by the International Criminal Court. This did not mean that these countries were not against war crimes and crimes against humanity. However, this was the reason why the Rome Statute had not been ratified.
Article 303 of the Criminal Code specified that the recruitment of children was illegal. However, if there was a need to amend the Code and insert more specific provisions in line with the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, this could be done.
Concerning extraterritorial jurisdiction, Algerian legislation recognized the criminalisation of Algerian citizens who committed acts outside of Algeria, by the other country, if there was a bilateral agreement which defined procedures for prosecuting.
The Child Protection Ombudsman received complaints but was not competent to examine them. This was done by the Ministry of Justice.
Regarding measures taken to protect children against radicalisation, and whether there were there any courses or awareness raising programmes explaining to children how to avoid radicalisation online, the delegation informed that there were many activities in this direction, which included oversight by the imams.
On complaints filed by cadets, the delegation assured the Committee that these pupils were protected by the State against any harassment, complaints and bullying.
Concluding Remarks
In concluding remarks, BERNARD GASTAUD, Committee Expert and Rapporteur on Algeria, thanked the delegation for taking part in this fruitful dialogue, which had allowed the Members of the Committee to understand the situation. It had become clear, however, throughout the dialogue, that the Optional Protocol had not yet been fully applied neither administratively, nor technically, nor legally in Algeria. He invited the State party to ensure the full and complete implementation thereof.
Toufik Djouama, Charge d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in concluding remarks, thanked the Committee for the very fruitful exchange of information, which had also enabled the delegation to better understand the provisions of the Protocol. He reaffirmed the full unswerving commitment to the implementation of the Protocol and to all other international instruments that Algeria had ratified. This was an ongoing process and Algeria was not perfect, but was fully committed to achieving perfection. The delegation had taken note of all the information and remarks during the dialogue and ensured the Committee that any measures for improvement in the direction of the promotion and protection of children’s rights mentioned during the dialogue would be undertaken.
OLGA KHAZOVA, Committee Vice Chairperson, thanked the delegation and wished them a safe return. She hoped that the children of Algeria would never have to deal with armed conflict.
For use of the information media; not an official record
CRC18/016E