 |
|
 |
This Response to the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children
and Young People’s Draft Priorities for Action and Draft
Corporate Plan
Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children
January 2005
Introduction
The Children’s Law Centre is a voluntary organisation
that was established in 1997 in response to a total deficit
in Northern Ireland in respect of training and development
on the issues of children’s rights. It uses the law
to promote, protect and realise children’s rights and
is founded on the principles enshrined in The United Nations
Convention On The Rights of the Child. It strives to meet
the following aims:-
• To develop awareness among children and young people
of their rights
• To increase public understanding of children’s
rights
• To promote policies and legislation which give children
a better life
• To make a reality of children’s rights
We offer training and research on children’s rights,
we make submissions on law, policy and practice affecting
children and young people and we run an advice/information/representation
service. We have a dedicated free phone advice line for children
and young people called CHALKY and a youth advisory group
called Youth @ clc.
We also seek to ensure that the equality provisions of the
Northern Ireland Act 1998 are upheld with specific respect
to children and young people.
Save the Children is an international non-government organisation
working in over 50 countries worldwide to protect the most
vulnerable children and their families and to highlight, and
where possible address, the denial of their rights. We work
through independent research and advocacy, and by providing
practical responses, in partnership with communities, other
NGO’s, public bodies, and children themselves, wherever
children’s rights are denied. Save the Children is committed
to making a reality of the rights of children which are enshrined
in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
From their perspectives as organisations, which work with
and on behalf of children, both directly and indirectly, the
Children's Law Centre and Save the Children are grateful for
the opportunity to make this submission to the Northern Ireland
Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY) and to
offer further assistance in drawing up their Priorities for
Action and Corporate Plan.
In responding to the NICCY Draft Priorities for Action and
Draft Corporate Plan, we consulted with Youth@clc, the Children’s
Law Centre’s youth group which is made up of young people
aged between 15-21 years, from various backgrounds who aim
to ensure that the voices of children and young people are
heard at local and national levels of decision-making. The
primary aim of Youth@clc is to promote awareness of children’s
rights, with an ultimate goal of every child and young person
in Northern Ireland being fully aware of their rights and
the laws that affect them. The views expressed by Youth@clc
feed into this response.
General Comments
The Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children welcome
the consultation exercise on NICCY’s Draft Corporate
Plan and Draft Priorities and hope to have a valuable and
constructive input into the final versions of both documents
through comments made in this consultation response. The Children’s
Law Centre and Save the Children believe that both the NICCY
Draft Priorities for Action and Draft Corporate Plan should
be viewed together as the final Priorities for Action will
have a large role to play in the determination of the corporate
aims and objectives undertaken by NICCY’s office for
the period of 2005-2008.
We are of the view that both documents should include information
on the UNCRC more widely throughout setting the framework
for NICCY’s strategic operation very clearly within
the UNCRC. The Convention is a set of non-negotiable and legally
binding minimum standards and obligations in respect of all
aspects of children’s lives which the government has
committed itself to and NICCY must have regard to the Convention
in exercising all of his functions, as detailed in The Commissioner
for Children and Young People (Northern Ireland) Order 2003
(The Order). This must be unequivocally stated to allow adequate
weight to be given to the Convention and its importance in
NICCY’s operation. The importance of the Convention
must be highlighted and real value attributed to it in line
with the promotion and awareness raising of children’s
rights and the mainstreaming and implementation of the UNCRC.
While the Commissioner is only legally obligated to have regard
to the relevant provisions of the CRC we believe that the
Commissioner’s work on the CRC can be considerably strengthened
by drawing on other international human rights standards where
these complement the CRC standards.
In light of the fact that NICCY is a newly established institution,
we feel that there may be considerable merit in NICCY elaborating
further on the duties and powers of his office.
With regard to the consultation process, we would respectfully
draw to your attention some difficulties we and others encountered.
These include difficulties in accessing the Draft Corporate
Plan and the Draft Equality Scheme, which we will comment
on separately, and determining the deadlines for comment.
Perhaps the NICCY website could be better utilised when consultations
are taking place to ensure that NICCY benefits from informed
comment from a wide range of interested parties.
Youth@clc made some comments in relation to the layout of
the draft priorities document and some felt that the language
was condescending and the sentences were erratically structured.
NICCY should state how they carried out direct consultation
with children and young people. There have been a number of
recent problems in relation to direct consultation with the
section 75 groups, especially children and young people, some
of which have resulted in invoking the Equality Commission’s
formal complaints and investigations procedures. It is vital
that NICCY is the champion, and is seen as such, in carrying
out, promoting and encouraging good practice in relation to
direct consultation with children and young people. This is
particularly important in compliance with Article 12 of the
UNCRC, one of the principles of the Convention - Respect for
the views of the Child. In examining the government’s
compliance with Article 12, the UNCRC Committee recommended
that the government, “...take further steps to promote,
facilitate and monitor systematic, meaningful and effective
participation of all groups of children in society”.
It is vital that NICCY takes the lead in examining new and
more effective models of participation. Youth@clc also questioned
the methods used in consulting with very marginalised young
people and the facilitation of debate between NICCY and those
children and young people that consultation processes generally
do not reach, for example, children in the youth justice system,
children being looked after, members of ethnic minority groups
etc. While they welcomed NICCY carrying out consultation in
27 schools, they questioned what action NICCY took to ensure
that the voices of children not in school were heard and taken
into account. We would be grateful if NICCY would respond
with details of how they have consulted directly with children
and young people and how extensively this process was carried
out.
We would also be grateful if NICCY would respond with details
of the system which they intend to use to analyse responses
to this consultation process in terms of the degree of weight
which will be attributed to both individual and organisational
responses. This is a vital element to drawing conclusions
from responses and progressing with identified areas for immediate
action or otherwise. For this reason, we would appreciate
information both on the system itself and on its operation
for the purposes of analysis.
NICCY Research
The Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children welcome
the production of the very comprehensive NICCY commissioned
research, “Children’s Rights in Northern Ireland”.
This research captures the reality of children’s lives
in Northern Ireland and it is vital in informing our understanding
of children’s rights in those areas where children are
failing to gain access to their rights. This detailed and
up to date analysis of children’s rights in Northern
Ireland, informed by the views of over 1000 children and young
people and over 350 individuals working with and for children
and young people provides a sound basis from which to develop
priorities which will inform the future strategic direction
of NICCY’s office. While the NICCY research is mentioned
in the NICCY draft priorities, members of youth@clc felt that
further explanation around the findings of the research and
how they informed the priorities was lacking and would be
very useful if provided.
The research report is proving to be a valued resource in
informing a child rights focus to the development of legislation,
policy and practice for children and young people. Both the
Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children firmly support
NICCY in the production of an annual publication on the state
of children’s rights in Northern Ireland and believes
that evidence based research such as this is fundamental in
accurately and effectively informing both NICCY’s immediate
and future corporate aims and priorities.
Mission, Values and Vision
NICCY’s powers are recognised as being among the most
extensive awarded to a Children’s Commissioner worldwide.
In examining NICCY’s draft mission statement, vision
and values, we believe that NICCY should use more powerful
and positive language to illustrate these extensive powers
and underline its commitment to utilise these powers. We are
aware of the immense benefit that NICCY will have in safeguarding,
promoting and realising children’s rights in Northern
Ireland, but feel that suggestions for consideration may be
useful to illustrate these points, which we offer below.
Suggested Mission – To safeguard and promote the rights
and best interests of children and young people in accordance
with International standards. We will do this by ensuring
that their voices are heard and by using all of our statutory
powers to the full to achieve the realisation and delivery
of the rights of children and young people in Northern Ireland.
We feel that the above suggested mission statement builds
on NICCY’s draft mission statement, putting greater
emphasis on its extensive powers and making stronger commitments
to ensuring the delivery of children’s rights, through
participation and use of international standards as per The
Commissioner for Children and Young People (Northern Ireland)
Order 2003 (The Order).
Suggested Values – They are to:
• Recognise children and young people as rights holders
and focus on their rights and best interests;
• Have regard to the role of parents and carers of children
and young people;
• Use the full range of our powers to bring about change;
• Promote the participation of children and young people
in a meaningful way;
• Be independent and trustworthy;
• Be welcoming and friendly, responsive and accessible;
• Be committed to ongoing monitoring and evaluation
and open to change;
• Serve all children and young people without discrimination;
• Be flexible and innovative, seeking timely and appropriate
solutions;
• Work and proactively communicate with others in a
collaborative and co-operative manner;
• Be an effective, efficient and open organisation that
is accountable;
• Value and care for staff, invest in our people and
to be a family friendly organisation.
We believe that the suggested values use more positive language
which demonstrates the enthusiasm of all who have been involved
in the campaign for NICCY’s office and NICCY itself.
They make a firmer commitment to children and young people
and clearly make reference to the extensive powers of NICCY,
while more closely reflecting the letter and spirit of the
Order. We believe that the amendments which we have suggested
serve to clarify the values and those which we have included,
we believe, address areas which should be included in NICCY’s
values. We have suggested the removal of one of the draft
values – Base our work on objective evidence and research
– as we believe that this is unduly restrictive at this
stage given the lack of such research and data. Perhaps a
commitment to promote the production of objective evidence
and research would be more appropriate, given the current
unavailability of data and the importance of not unduly fettering
NICCY in carrying out its functions.
NICCY’s draft vision could be more aspirational in terms
of what it hopes to see achieved in the field of children’s
rights generally in Northern Ireland. We would hope that the
NICCY vision would influence or possibly be adopted by other
organisations working in the field of children’s rights.
In view of this, we urge NICCY to develop a long term societal
vision, of which, NICCY plays a vital role in its realisation.
The Context in which NICCY operates
In outlining the legislative and policy context, we are of
the view that the language used could be more positively framed
and illustrative of the immense benefit that children in Northern
Ireland will gain due to NICCY’s operation and its extensive
powers. In relation to the initial comment regarding NICCY’s
powers we are concerned that it may be misconstrued as somewhat
negative, rather than as acknowledging the extensive powers
that NICCY possesses. NICCY has been given extensive powers
which they must use strategically and in a timely manner to
secure the provision of rights for children and young people
in Northern Ireland, not only when they, “exhaust all
other possibilities”.
We welcome the fact that NICCY states that it wishes to see
improvements in proposed legislation for the protection of
children and young people from abuse and the difficulties
they encounter from sectarianism, racism, discrimination as
a result of disability and sexual orientation. NICCY states
that they will work with The Equality Commission and other
statutory bodies to remove these difficulties. We believe
that non-governmental organisations (NGO’s), such as
the Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children, also
have a role in partnership working with NICCY and feel that
NGO’s should be included here.
More generally, while we understand the need to avoid creating
a very large inaccessible document, we feel that this section
could be more detailed, drawing on the NICCY research, to
set the context out more comprehensively. This section would
benefit from providing a quick, yet more comprehensive, overview
of the legislative and policy context in terms of employment,
youth justice, education, care, family etc. There is also
an argument for providing much more detail in terms of the
policy context which NICCY envisages for the next few years.
The UNCRC’s Committee’s scheduling of the UK government
for reporting and examination in 2007/08 will represent an
extremely important independent review of the UK government’s
record on implementing the UNCRC. NICCY will have a significant
contribution to make to this process and this should be incorporated
into the Corporate Plan. NICCY may also wish to consider raising
children’s rights issues with the other international
treaty monitoring bodies due to examine the UK government
in 2006/2007, namely the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination
Against Women and the Committee on the Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. A number of these future legislative and
policy development are detailed in the NICCY research and
we feel that this section should be reviewed in light of the
NICCY research and the Commissioner’s enabling legislation,
outlining the powers and functions of the Commissioner.
Political and administrative
The language used in this section could be stronger in places.
When referring to the impending Review of Public Administration
(RPA), NICCY states that they “hope” that there
will be no adverse impact on children as a result. Perhaps
it would be more proactive to state that NICCY will strenuously
defend against any adverse impact on children as a result
of the RPA. Again, reference should be made to the UNCRC Committee
Report in 2007/08. We believe that the language in this section,
when referring to the UNCRC, does not reflect NICCY’s
statutory responsibility. NICCY states that they will work
in a co-ordinated manner, “mindful” of the UN
Convention. The statutory framework, under which NICCY is
tasked to operate, dictates that NICCY must have regard to
the Convention. It is imperative that NICCY attributes, and
is seen to attribute, a great deal of importance to the Convention
as it is the foundation for children’s rights. Only
through, as a minimum, mainstreaming of the rights contained
in the UNCRC, use of its provisions and its implementation
will we achieve the most basic realisation of children’s
rights in Northern Ireland.
Economic and social
There is an obvious gap in this section in terms of reference
to and proposed action by NICCY on the recent funding cuts
and reduced investment by government in children’s services.
NICCY is clearly very active in lobbying government around
concerns arising from the budget and the proposed loss of
Children Fund funding. However, as a result of the loss of
this ring-fenced money for children’s services by the
end of the current funding cycle in 2006, there is a likelihood
that some very valuable projects will be lost and will result
in reduced service provision for some of the most vulnerable
children in Northern Ireland. NICCY should outline its work
in this area and how they intend to continue work on this
issue in this section.
Value for money
We recognise the need for NICCY to provide value for money
in carrying out its work and while some of the developments
in audit and control arrangements will impact on its management
activities, we would urge NICCY to be cautious of aligning
itself too closely with government policies, such as Best
Value and Modernising Government. Both Best Value and Modernising
Government have been widely and independently critiqued and
are not without their failings. It is imperative that NICCY
is, and is seen as, truly independent from government and
while there are opportunities to learn from government initiatives,
we would advocate that reasonable care is taken.
Finance
In this section NICCY outlines the three main functions on
which its money will be spent – Listening to young people
by being alongside them, hearing their concerns and promoting
their rights: assisting advising and advocating for and on
behalf of children and young people and their parents; reviewing
services and the law relating to children and undertaking
research. While we see these as very important functions of
NICCY, there is a clear three-way split in expenditure, with
no reference to the carrying out of formal investigations.
NICCY has very wide powers of investigation and as a result
of these investigations, can make recommendations to government.
Presumably, carrying out investigations will be financed by
the NICCY budget, yet it appears to have been overlooked in
this section. We strongly recommend that NICCY budgets for
carrying out investigations as it is a separate enforcement
tool that does not fall under any of the headings in this
section. NICCY must be seen as preparing for carrying out
investigations and willing and ready to use all of its statutory
powers. There is also an issue around the NICCY casework budget
given NICCY’s statutory powers and the importance of
the use of strategic litigation in the promotion of children’s
rights. It is fundamental that there are adequate resources
to allow NICCY to carry out this function and the issue of
resources must not unduly fetter NICCY’s discretion
to exercise these powers.
Review of the Office of NICCY
We note that NICCY will be subject to a review by government
in the period 2005-08 and fully support NICCY in its intention
to make certain they have the right people, doing the right
things, at the right time.
Our Priorities
In light of the separate consultation being carried out on
NICCY’s Draft Priorities, we will comment on this section
in detail in conjunction with the priorities themselves -
see page 13 of this document.
Corporate Objectives
The NICCY draft corporate objectives are very general and
do not have an obvious connection to the draft priorities
for action. NICCY needs to include its draft priorities within
its corporate objectives as its priority areas for action
should surely form its main body of the work. The use of the
balanced scorecard as a management tool to formulate corporate
objectives has resulted in this section being rather confusing.
The heading, “People Outside NICCY” is really
about what NICCY intends to do, but this overlaps with How
things will be done, for example, develop and evaluate a programme
of service reviews and investigations using agreed criteria
is under the heading of “How we do things” and
what is going to be done and how this is going to be done
don’t correlate. Money and staff are matters of organisational
effectiveness and should come under one heading dealing with
internal, organisational matters. We feel that it would be
much clearer if NICCY laid out its strategic aims with clear
and measurable objectives under each aim. The strategic aims
should be consistent with the Paris Principles, the NICCY
founding legislation, the NICCY research, the UNCRC, the UNCRC
Committee’s Concluding Observations and General Comments.
In addition to an aim and clear objectives around organisational
effectiveness and development, we are of the view that it
may be useful to consider utilising the framework developed
by UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre around the aims and functions
of Independent Human Rights Institutions for Children –
see Appendix 1. Based on this framework, other suggested aims
and objectives include,
Promote compliance with international children’s rights
standards, influence policy and law makers to take greater
account of children’s rights.
• Work intensively for the incorporation of the UNCRC
and for the protection of general principles of the UNCRC
in domestic law;
• Lobby for the development of effective political and
administrative structures and mechanisms to effectively co-ordinate
the implementation of the UNCRC;
• Seek to ensure that the Children’s Strategy
acts as the implementation plan for the UNCRC in Northern
Ireland;
• Seek to ensure that the Bill of Rights reflects internationally
recognised children’s rights standards and provides
the greatest possible protection for children and young people;
• Scrutinise legislation, policy and practice for compliance
with international standards and monitor the extent to which
NICCY’s recommendations are accepted and implemented;
• Produce an annual comprehensive report on the state
of children’s rights;
• Comment on government reports to UN human rights treaty
monitoring bodies and engage independently with these bodies;
• Undertake strategic litigation.
Listen to and encourage the active involvement and engagement
of children and young people
• Develop and promote models of best practice on consulting
with children and young people and ensuring active participation;
• Maintain and develop a children and young people’s
advisory forum;
• Work with the Equality Commission, NGO’s and
children and young people on ways to maximise the potential
of Section 75 in respect of the age criterion;
• Work intensively for the introduction of specific
child impact analysis of policies and practices;
• Promote the rights of children and young people to
be heard and have their views taken into consideration through
the establishment of schools councils.
Promote awareness of children and young people’s rights
among adults and children
• Provide targeted education and training on children’s
rights;
• Establish NICCY as a central point for advice and
information on children’s rights;
• Use of the media and information briefings to raise
public awareness of children’s rights;
• Promote the inclusion of children’s rights training
in all schools curricula.
Identify and address violations of children’s rights
• Carry out investigations and service reviews in line
with agreed criteria (list key areas investigations and service
reviews are planned in);
• Provide a responsive, accessible and targeted complaints
and advice service;
• Provide targeted assistance to children and young
people in legal proceedings;
• Promote the development of child sensitive procedures
and independent advocacy services;
• Develop and implement a comprehensive strategy for
persuading the courts to use the UNCRC as an interpretive
tool;
• Act as amicus curiae;
• Take cases in NICCY’s name in line with agreed
case work criteria;
• Operate an independent appeals mechanism.
Monitoring and Review
NICCY should include a section on monitoring and review of
the implementation of the Corporate Strategy to ensure that
all commitments and functions are being fulfilled. There is
a marked lack of information on monitoring and review and
there should be child rights indicators put in place to measure
the progress of implementation. While there is obviously a
need for individual business and workplans with targets and
indicators, there should also be a set of indicators for monitoring
and evaluating the delivery of the Corporate Plan.
Legal Assistance
The Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children argued
strongly for the inclusion of and very much welcomed the powers
to bring, intervene or assist in legal proceedings in the
Order and are of the view that the appropriate exercise of
these powers, will be of crucial importance in the realisation
of children’s rights in Northern Ireland. For this reason
we believe that this section of the corporate plan should
be circulated to the Accredited Solicitors Panel, the Bar
Council, the Law Society, the Family Law Committee of the
Law Society, the Guardian Ad Litem Agency, the Official Solicitor
and to judges/magistrates/lay magistrates.
We support the development of a strategy by NICCY to dictate
its criteria for legal assistance. We recognise that it is
essential that NICCY is extremely strategic in terms of resources
and for this reason we agree that clear criteria must be developed
and widely circulated. NICCY must ensure, however, that any
criteria adopted do not unduly fetter it’s discretion.
There is however a lack of clarity in the draft corporate
plan about the types of legal assistance that NICCY aims to
provide. We would suggest, therefore, that the five distinct
legal functions of NICCY are dealt with under separate headings
so that there is clarity from the outset about the circumstances
in which NICCY will exercise these powers:
• Firstly, a paragraph should set out the circumstances
and criteria on which NICCY will bring/ initiate legal proceedings
pursuant to article 14 (1) (a) of the Order;
• Secondly, a paragraph should set out the circumstances
in which NICCY will intervene in proceedings pursuant to article
14 (1)(b) of the Order – it is essential that children
and their families/carers and solicitors representing children
are given clear guidance about when and how it may be appropriate
in cases to approach NICCY with a request to intervene in
cases and that this is widely publicised.
• Thirdly, a paragraph should set out clearly the grounds
for NICCY acting as an amicus curiae in legal proceedings
at the request of the court.
• Fourthly, the criteria for assisting a case under
article 15 (2) should be clearly set out. In this respect
it is our view that it is unclear from the criteria set out
in the corporate plan whether in order to fulfil the criteria
for legal assistance all of the criteria under article 15
(2) must be met. Clarification of whether the criteria run
conjunctively or disjunctively is required in the corporate
plan. Article 15 (2) and (3) of the Order states,
“15. (2) Where the child or young person applies to
the Commissioner for assistance in relation to proceedings
to which this Article applies, the Commissioner may, subject
to paragraph (3), grant the application if he is satisfied
that -
(a) the case raises a question of principle;
(b) it would be unreasonable to expect the child or young
person to deal with the case without assistance because of
its complexity, or because of his position in relation to
another person involved, or for some other reason; or
(c) there are other special circumstances which make it appropriate
for the Commissioner to provide assistance.
(3) The Commissioner shall not grant an application for assistance
under paragraph (2) unless it appears to him that there is
no other person or body likely to provide such assistance.”
The use of the word ‘or’ implies that the criteria
under Article 15 (2) are disjunctive in the Order, but as
this has not been elaborated on in the criteria and further
clarification is required. We also are of the view that the
criteria should include the urgency of the case as a consideration
for legal assistance.
We would suggest that there should be flexibility around whether
or not the issue comes within the agreed priorities as set
out in the Corporate Plan. Very often issues which will require
assistance from NICCY may not have been anticipated at the
time of drawing up the Corporate Plan and the criteria, in
light of article 15 (2) (c) of the Order, in our view must
be flexible enough to allow for support to be given in such
cases. We would suggest that the criterion, “The outcome
will impact on a number of children,” should be amended
to include where the outcome may impact on only one child
in matters of egregious breaches of children’s rights
or where a child has a substantial amount to gain from intervention
and assistance from NICCY.
The criteria should also explicitly include where there are
other special circumstances where it might be appropriate
to provide assistance in line with article 15(2) (c) of the
Order (above). It is essential that NICCY has reasonable discretion,
rather than being bound by inflexible criteria.
• Fifthly, a paragraph should clearly set out the procedures
and criteria which will be established for the development
of a mechanism for funding cases to be taken by other organisations/
solicitors representing children.
We would suggest that it would be helpful to provide some
information at the beginning of the legal assistance section
about the following matters;
• Is it intended to have a separate detailed case work
policy and referral policy and if so where can this be accessed
and will this be sent out for consultation?
• Details of the application process and where to access
application forms.
• Referral arrangements both to and from NICCY and statutory
and voluntary organisations and solicitors.
• The decision making structures in place e.g. is there
a case work committee?
• Is there an appeals mechanism in place for the cases
that NICCY will not support?
• What criteria /procedures exist currently in terms
of funding other organisations/solicitors to take cases on
behalf of children and what is the procedure for applying
for funding?
• An outline of any protocols between NICCY and other
statutory and voluntary organisations including the Legal
Services Commission.
• Will NICCY act as amicus curiae and provide supportive
affidavits for cases taken by other organisations/solicitors
and if so how can an application be made?
• How do organisations such as the Children’s
Law Centre and Save the Children draw to the attention of
NICCY strategic cases which they believe should be taken in
NICCY’s name?
• What staff will NICCY have on their legal team?
• Reference to NICCY’s child protection and confidentiality
policy which will operate in the context of legal advice and
representation.
• NICCY’s policy in relation to Article 15 (5)
of the Order with regard to recovery of expenses from a child/young
person.
• NICCY’s policy with regard to costs awards –
i.e. will NICCY indemnify applicants against any award of
costs against them?
We note that NICCY intends to continue to operate an open
door policy and will continue to offer children and young
people help to seek advice and assistance from the most appropriate
organisation. The Children’s Law Centre currently operates
the CHALKY free phone advice service for children and young
people and a strategic casework service. We have also developed
a network of solicitors throughout Northern Ireland with an
expertise and interest in children’s rights and we operate
a referral system which has been agreed by the Law Society.
The Children’s Law Centre hopes to work constructively
with NICCY in this regard by drawing up a working protocol
arrangement between the two organisations.
We would suggest that NICCY may wish to consider the development
of a legal advisory panel which could serve as a forum for
sharing of legal information and ideas throughout Northern
Ireland.
Investigatory Powers
NICCY has extensive and powerful investigatory powers as detailed
in articles 16 -23 of the Order. We are concerned that these
powers do not appear to be reflected in the Draft Corporate
Plan. It is vital that NICCY indicates a readiness to utilise
these powers, particularly in light of the serious difficulties
encountered by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
in attempting to conduct investigations. We would welcome
greater clarity in relation to the proposed use of investigatory
powers including powers to require the examination and attendance
of witnesses, the production of documents and powers of entry,
as well as an indication of where within the Corporate Plan,
these powers are located. It is essential that NICCY exercises
all the powers it has been given, particularly in light of
the statutory reviews which NICCY must carry out and report
on every three years, as detailed in article 24 of the Order,
and the increased likelihood of both government and NGO scrutiny.
NICCY’s investigatory powers will become even more vital
if the proposed Inquiries Bill is passed into legislation.
This legislation will reduce the public nature of parliamentary
and public scrutiny. NICCY’s investigatory powers and
their use are fundamental to ensuring that this public scrutiny
occurs in the furtherance of children’s rights in Northern
Ireland.
NICCY’s Draft Priorities
The Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children welcome
the widespread public consultation on the draft priorities
for action and recognise the magnitude of this task. The NICCY
research and the UNCRC Committee’s recommendations serve
to confirm what our experience has taught us; there is much
work to be done in achieving, “real change” in
all of the areas where children are currently being denied
their rights in Northern Ireland. We recognise all of the
areas identified as priority areas for action and stress the
need for NICCY to be extremely strategic in terms of resources.
We will not attempt to rank the priorities by ‘importance’
as this is relative to the children and young people affected
by a particular issue, and wish to query how this will be
carried out as a great deal of the issues are very complex.
This was an issue for the members of youth@clc and they questioned
how NICCY intends to attribute weight to the recommendations
contained within the consultation responses received in terms
of ranking. There is clearly an element of automatic prioritisation
to be considered in relation to both the statutory framework
under which NICCY has been tasked to operate, The Commissioner
for Children and Young People (Northern Ireland) Order 2003
(The Order), and the corresponding UNCRC Committee recommendations.
Article 6 of the Order states the Principal aim of NICCY and
6 (3) of The Order states that,
“(3) In determining whether and, if so, how to exercise
his functions under this Order, the Commissioner shall have
regard to -
(a) the importance of the role of parents in the upbringing
and development of their children; and
(b) any relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of the Child.” (Our emphasis)
Clearly this statutory obligation automatically prioritises
‘Implementation of the UNCRC,’ as NICCY must have
regard to it, the UNCRC Committee’s Concluding Observations
and General Comments in exercising its functions.
The UNCRC Committee, in its concluding observations in October
2002 also expressed concern that the principles and provisions
of the Convention have not yet been incorporated into domestic
law. Commenting on Article 4, the Committee said,
“The Committee encourages the State party to incorporate
into domestic law the rights, principles and provisions of
the Convention in order to ensure that all legislation complies
with the Convention and that the provisions and principles
of the Convention are widely applied in legal and administrative
proceedings. The State party is also encouraged to provide
training in the provisions of the Convention and to disseminate
the Convention more widely.” (CRC/C/15/Add.188)
Article 5(d) of the Order states that NICCY shall take reasonable
steps to ensure,
“(d) the views of children and young persons and their
parents are sought concerning the exercise by the Commissioner
of his functions.”
Similarly, Article 6(2)(b) of the Order states that in carrying
out its functions,
“(b) The Commissioner shall have regard in particular
to the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child or young
person (considered in the light of his age and understanding)”
This refers quite clearly to the area of, ‘Having Your
Say.’ The NICCY research identified having your say
as a significant cross-cutting theme which is fundamental
to the realisation of all children’s rights and that,
listening to young people and making their views count is
the, “single most important issue” for children
and young people in Northern Ireland.
“...there is no other single issue that is so commonly
and widely identified by children and young people and the
adults who work with and for them.”
The UNCRC Committee expressed concern about the lack of consistency
of the application of Article 12 of the Convention –
Respect for the views of the child, the lack of consultation
in education and independent representation in legal proceedings.
The Committee recommended that,
“ ...the State party... take further steps to promote,
facilitate and monitor systematic, meaningful and effective
participation of all groups of children in society, including
in schools, for example through school councils. Furthermore,
it recommends that the State party take further steps to consistently
reflect the obligations of both paragraphs of article 12 in
legislation, and that legislation governing court procedures
and administrative proceedings (including divorce and separation
proceedings) ensure that a child capable of forming his/her
own views has the right to express those views and that they
are given due weight. The Committee further recommends that
procedures be established that would allow the views expressed
by children to be taken into account in and to have an impact
on developing programmes and policies affecting them.”
Article 6(1) of the Order, states,
“6. - (1) The principal aim of the Commissioner in exercising
his functions under this Order is to safeguard and promote
the rights and best interests of children and young persons.”
Compounding this, Article 7, which outlines the Duties of
NICCY, states at 7(1)(a),
“7. - (1) The Commissioner shall promote -
(a) an understanding of the rights of children and young persons”
These sections of the Order place a statutory obligation on
NICCY to promote the rights and an understanding of the rights
of children. This clearly falls under the area of, ‘Knowing
Your Rights.’ The starting point in ensuring that children
secure their rights is the development of a societal awareness
of the Convention. The UNCRC Committee in its concluding observations
was seriously concerned at the lack of awareness among most
children of their rights under the Convention, commenting
on Article 42 they stated,
“...the Committee recommends that the State party:
(a) Substantially expand dissemination of information on the
Convention and its implementation among children and parents,
civil society and all sectors and levels of government, including
initiatives to reach vulnerable groups;
(b) Develop systematic and ongoing training programmes on
human rights, including children’s rights, for all professional
groups working for and with children (e.g. judges, lawyers,
law enforcement officials, civil servants, local government
officials, personnel working in institutions and places of
detention for children, teachers and health personnel).”
It is clear from the above that further and additional prioritisation
of issues which affect children and young people must flow
only from these initial statutory priorities which underpin
and form the cornerstone of the work of NICCY.
The NICCY research highlights the huge number of issues which
impact on the lives of children and young people in Northern
Ireland, with the research team’s primary task being,
“…to identify areas where children’s rights
are being ignored or underplayed.” In addition to this,
the research highlights the issues which should become priorities
for NICCY and makes corresponding recommendations. It states
that in making these recommendations for priority areas for
action,
“Judgments have been made on the basis of the information
we gathered comprising the views of children and young people,
the concerns of those working with and for children, analysis
of legal and policy documents, statistics, and existing research.
Also taken into account were the following factors in determining
which issues should be priorities:
• Those of most concern for children and young people;
• Situations representing egregious breaches of children's
rights, in particular areas where children are being exposed
to physical or mental harm;
• Situations which raise a question of incompatibility
with one or more of the fundamental guiding principles of
the Convention (non-discrimination, best interests of the
child, life, survival and development and participation);
• Where the breach has the capacity to undermine the
child's enjoyment of other rights;
• Concerns raised by the Committee on the Rights of
the Child in its Concluding Observations on the United Kingdom
in 2002, which have not yet been remedied.”
In the Commissioner’s foreword to the Draft Corporate
Plan, he states that,
“We commissioned a team from Queen’s University,
Belfast to carry out a major review of how children and young
people in Northern Ireland fare against the international
standard laid down in the United Nations Convention on the
Rights of the Child (UNCRC). This invaluable work has helped
us decide on our priorities and where we should focus resources
to achieve a positive outcome for children and young people.”
Also in the Draft Corporate Plan, under “Our Priorities”,
NICCY states that,
“In using the research to help us decide our priorities
for action we considered the findings of the research against
a number of criteria, set out below. We also considered our
experience of complaints presented to us over the course of
our first months, the feedback from children and young people
on our Young People’s panel and elsewhere and our collective
experience of issues faced by children and young people in
Northern Ireland. We also considered the issues the Committee
on the Rights of the Child identify as “outstanding
business” for the UK and Northern Ireland.
In agreeing our priorities for action we used the following
criteria:
• Issues that impact on most children or which are very
serious breaches of rights (which may affect only a few children
in terms of risk to their life or serious harm);
• Issues identified by children and young people as
very important;
• Issues NICCY has received a lot of complaints about;
• Issues that fall within the remit of our statutory
duties.”
There is clearly a variance between the NICCY Draft Corporate
Plan and the NICCY research in terms of the range of priorities
identified and the criteria used. It is the view of both the
Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children that more
weight should have been attributed to the recommendations
of the UNCRC Committee, the General Comments and the UNCRC
itself in determining the NICCY Draft Priorities. Article
6 (3) of The Order makes specific reference to the UNCRC and
states that, in determining whether and how to exercise his
functions, NICCY shall have regard to,
“(b) any relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of the Child.”
We feel that in determining the NICCY Draft Priorities, the
exercise should have begun very clearly with the UNCRC Committee
recommendations as these illustrate the areas where the UNCRC,
as a minimum standard, is not being complied with in Northern
Ireland. The NICCY research in recommending priorities for
action, also takes into account where there is a question
of incompatibility with one or more of the fundamental guiding
principles of the Convention.
While there is merit in using the criterion of “issues
NICCY has received a lot of complaints about” to determine
the Draft Priorities, we believe that relying on this criterion
may be a little premature at this stage. It may not be suitable
as there is still a general lack of knowledge about the presence
and role of NICCY and the period of time which complaints
were received for is inadequate - “…our first
months,” . Similar concerns were also expressed by members
of youth@clc. Resultantly, we do not feel that use of this
criterion will provide an adequate reflection of all of the
most important issues for children and young people in the
wider community. The Children’s Law Centre’s advice
line, CHALKY, has produced statistics which indicate areas
of concern which NICCY has not considered within its priorities,
leading us to believe that these areas are not ones which
NICCY has received complaints about – see Appendix 2.
Examples of these areas include Pupil Welfare, Suspensions
and Expulsions, Homelessness and Social Security, Contact
and Residence and Employment. Notably, these are reflected
in the NICCY research. There is also a broader issue in terms
of using criteria such as complaints received about particular
issues. There are a number of very important issues for children
and young people which may never generate a high number of
complaints for reasons such as lack of knowledge, fear, contrasting
cultural attitudes, etc. Examples of these include the UNCRC,
physical punishment, Traveller and other ethnic minority group
concerns, children in abusive situations who are afraid to
make a complaint etc. While it is important to analyse and
monitor the complaints which NICCY are receiving, questions
should also be asked about why certain issues are not transferring
across into the complaints statistics to determine issues
which may be important, not only because of the issue itself,
but also because of the failure of these issues to result
in complaints.
There are a number of the proposed priority areas which are
narrowly defined, for example, ‘Children with Disabilities
and Allied Health Therapies’ and ‘Special Educational
Needs and Autism’. This is in contrast to some of the
other priorities which are very broadly defined, such as Children
and Crime, which could mean a number of things. This was one
of the areas which youth@clc commented on and questioned how
these very specific references in the draft priorities came
about. We recognise that NICCY would not wish to exclude any
issues from consideration at this stage, however we are of
the view there is a possibility that these could be interpreted
as exclusionary or attributing a great deal of weight to some
very specific areas and not to others. There is also an issue
around the general application of the UNCRC in examining the
draft priorities. The UNCRC applies to all of NICCY’s
draft priorities and should underpin each priority area, however,
as expressed by youth@clc, its application under the policy
context is inconsistent and this should be addressed in order
to illustrate and reinforce the importance of the Convention
and its integral nature to all children’s rights.
There were a number of areas which youth@clc identified and
believe had not been adequately addressed within NICCY’s
draft priorities. These are; global issues and the international
community, for example, in relation to AIDS, famine and natural
disasters such as the recent tsunami in respect of raising
awareness of children’s rights. They feel that it is
important for children to have an understanding not only of
their own rights, but of issues going on outside of their,
‘own world’; the environment, there is no mention
of the environment in the document and youth@clc believe that
it is likely that this issue will affect all children at some
stage in their lives and they should be preparing for this
and learning how to protect it; domestic violence, there should
be more reference with the draft priorities to children who
are suffering, or living in homes with, domestic violence.
Having Your Say
As the, “single most important issue” for children
and young people in Northern Ireland, having your say is clearly
a matter of priority for NICCY. The NICCY research identified
this area as a significant cross-cutting theme, fundamental
to the realisation of all children’s rights. Because
of the importance of this area and the considerable legislative
mandate in relation to having your say, we are of the view
that it should cut across all priority areas for action and
also be extended to include making sure your views are taken
into consideration. The issue of participation is vital in
ensuring that children and young people can play an active
role in determining decisions, policies and practices. NICCY
must take a very proactive stance in relation to meaningful
consultation with children and young people. There are a number
of ongoing concerns regarding Government compliance with its
section 75 duty to consult directly with children and young
people. We support the NICCY research recommendation that,
“...the Commissioner should work with the Equality Commission
on ways to maximise the potential of section 75 in respect
of the age criterion and seek to collate and disseminate best
practice on how to consult with children and young people.”
We would however add that NICCY should also work with NGO’s
and children and young people in maximising the potential
of section 75. NICCY clearly has a role in developing models
of best practice in relation to participation and the promotion
of the use of these models as a matter of general practice.
This role should also include reviewing and policing the effectiveness
of approaches to participation adopted by statutory bodies.
One area which we feel has been omitted in children having
their say is in relation to family issues. Children have the
right to have their voices heard in relation to matters in
their family, such as living in or being subject to domestic
violence and in divorce, separation, contact and residency
proceedings. Children should be entitled to separate legal
representation in family cases in Family Proceedings Courts
in certain circumstances. The UNCRC Committee expressed its
concerns about the incorporation of Article 12 with regard
to this and stated,
“…the Committee is concerned that the obligations
of article 12 have not been consistently incorporated in legislation,
for example in private law procedures concerning divorce,
in adoption, in education and in protection throughout the
State party. In addition, the Committee is concerned that
the right of the child to independent representation in legal
proceedings… is not systematically exercised.”
The NICCY research compounded this by stating,
“Little or no attention is paid to the views and wishes
of children and young people in divorce or domestic violence
proceedings and the lack of separate representation in these
cases is a matter of very serious and widespread concern.”
The Children Order Advisory Committee is looking at this area
at present and is making recommendations for reform. NICCY
should feed into this process but should also lobby for legislative
reform to ensure that children and young people are afforded
the right to separate legal representation in family cases
in Family Proceedings Courts in certain circumstances to ensure
the consistent application of Article 12 of the UNCRC. This
is clearly an issue which NICCY must address under this priority
as an area for taking action.
There is a need for specific child rights impact analysis
and NICCY should examine ways to raise this issue and to campaign
for child rights proofing of government proposals and procedures.
There is also a need for NICCY to promote the development
of child sensitive procedures and independent advocacy services.
The NICCY research highlighted this area as a matter for concern
for children in care, in custody and for asylum seeking/refugee
children. Under section 10 of the Order, NICCY has the power
to review advocacy and complaints arrangements generally and
also at the behest of an individual child or young person.
NICCY is extremely well placed to ensure that complaints procedures
and advocacy services are accessible to all children and young
people and operate independently and effectively. This is
of significant importance given the reluctance of some children
in the care of the state to make complaints when they remain
in the care of the state.
Bullying
The NICCY research notes that bullying is a particular area
of concern for a number of different groups of children and
young people, including children with disabilities, children
with special educational needs; ethnic minority groups including
Traveller children; children living in poverty; young people
in care; and gay, lesbian and transgendered young people.
Youth@clc feels that in this section, NICCY acts rather reactively
and should look at measures to put in place to ensure that
bullying does not happen as opposed to examining what to do
when it does happen. One suggestion from the members of youth@clc
was the introduction of cultural diversity and ‘difference’
workshops from an early age at school.
The Youth@clc “Shout Out Soon Report” (SOS) (2004)
found that four percent (45) of children and young people
identified bullying as an issue for them. This took place
both in the community and in school, and across all age categories.
Children and young people stated that bullying is a topic
that is not talked about openly and suggested that communities
and schools should work together, be vigilant, and intervene
as soon as something is noticed. They expressed the need for
increased support systems, not only for the victim but also
for the bully.
NICCY should examine and highlight the impact of bullying
on specific groups of children to ensure that in developing
anti-bullying policies all statutory agencies are aware of
the particular issues for these children and young people,
deal with them in a sensitive and informed manner and take
proactive steps to prevent bullying.
We support the NICCY research recommendation that all staff
should be adequately trained in identifying and managing bullying
behaviour; incidents should be properly monitored and recorded;
and appropriate support should be put in place for all children
involved.
The UNCRC Committee recommendations state that the government
should,
“Take measures and set up adequate mechanisms and structures
to prevent bullying and other forms of violence in schools
and include children in the development and implementation
of these strategies, in light of the Committee’s recommendations
adopted at its day of general discussion on violence against
children within the family and in schools.”
In accordance with this, we argued for and welcome the statutory
requirement on schools to produce, in consultation with children
and young people, anti-bullying policies. NICCY will need
to monitor that the Department of Education and the Inspectorate
hold schools to account for the meaningful application of
that statutory duty. NICCY should also actively promote and
encourage all schools to consider certain forms of bullying,
including anti-racist and homophobic bullying.
Play and Leisure
The NICCY research states that,
“...there appears to be a lack of understanding of the
rights of children and young people to personal space, to
associate with others and to express themselves through play
and leisure.”
The research also highlights a number of key priority issues,
such as the need for appropriate, accessible play and leisure
facilities, the quality and safety of leisure/play space and
access to such facilities for children with disabilities and
those in rural communities. The Draft Strategy for Children
and Young People, which is currently being consulted on, aims
to address these issues with the development of a play and
recreation strategy for Northern Ireland. NICCY should inform
this strategy and promote optimum participation of children
and young people in all planning and development decisions.
Youth@clc’s SOS Report also highlights this area as
one for immediate action with the most common area of concern
highlighted by children and young people in the survey being
available amenities. Fifty seven percent (595) highlighted
this.
Road Safety and School Transport
The NICCY research identifies key issues related to the proposed
area of road safety and school transport, however it does
not identify these as key priorities and the UNCRC Committee
did not make any specific recommendations in relation to school
transport.
We believe that this priority area could be more broadly defined
to address other related issues, such as the cost of public
transport for young people in rural areas, ‘joy riding’,
speeding and the related high incidence of speed related deaths
of young male drivers. Youth@clc commented that while this
priority mentions issues such as ‘joy’ and ‘death’
riders, there should be more information on the actions NICCY
intends to take in order to address these issues. Youth@clc’s
SOS report found that a substantial number of children from
a variety of geographical locations did not feel safe in their
communities because of joyriding and gang activities, 4 percent
(37 highlighted joyriding as an issue). We support NICCY in
monitoring the implementation of the Northern Ireland Road
Safety Strategy and the target set by the DOE to halve the
current average number of children killed or seriously injured
each year by 2012.
Special Educational Needs and Autism
As mentioned above, we believe that this priority area is
very specific and narrowly defined and may be viewed as exclusionary
or as having additional weight attributed to it at the expense
of others. The NICCY research identifies the debate around
whether children with special educational needs can receive
education in mainstream schools as a key issue. The proposed
SENDO legislation will give parents a right to have their
children educated in mainstream schools provided that it is
not incompatible with the education of other children at the
school. NICCY should promote and highlight the child’s
right to receive education in mainstream schools as provided
by the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special
Educational Needs. We recognise that much of this debate focuses
on a resource/capacity issue and NICCY must lobby Government
to fulfil these forthcoming legislative obligations by fully
and effectively resourcing SENDO.
Resources and capacity issues were a central theme of the
NICCY research in relation to the provision of services. In
particular the need to invest in early intervention services
was identified as a means of preventing children with emotional
and behavioural difficulties being excluded from school. NICCY
should lobby for such services, particularly in light of the
UNCRC Committee’s concern at the high rate of temporary
and permanent exclusions affecting children with disabilities,
and its call for such educational inequality to be alleviated,
stating that the government should,
“Take all necessary measures to eliminate the inequalities
in educational achievement and in exclusion rates between
children from different groups and to guarantee all children
an appropriate quality education”
The need for early intervention services is also relevant
for looked after children. The NICCY research notes as an
issue of particular concern that,
“Studies would suggest that a higher proportion of looked
after children experience special education needs and/or are
statemented than would be the case amongst other school children
and that relevant intervention is occurring too late in their
education career.” (Pinkerton & McCrea, 1996, Sachdev
& Taylor, 1996, Kilpatrick & Barr, 1999)
We note that there is a review of the Code of Practice on
Special Educational Needs ongoing. NICCY must ensure that
this review is informed from a child rights perspective and
is influenced by children and young people and their parents
who have experience of the operation of the Code of Practice.
Participation is a vital aspect of this debate and NICCY should
develop and promote new and innovative models of participation.
The NICCY research also identifies as a priority,
“Children with special educational needs should have
their educational needs assessed promptly and appropriate
educational provision made for them.”
This refers to delays in assessments of educational needs
and statementing. NICCY should lobby for legislative reform
to introduce statutory time limits in respect of the statementing
process so that children with special educational needs in
Northern Ireland are treated equally to children in England
and Wales where such time limits do exist.
An issue of concern highlighted by the UNCRC Committee which
is also relevant is the application of the principle of non-discrimination
(Article 2, UNCRC) to children and young people aged between
16 and 18. The NICCY research stated that this is a particular
problem for children with learning disabilities accessing
further education, but noted that both the Departments of
Education and Employment and Learning are working on enhancing
educational provision in further education for children and
young people with special educational needs. NICCY should
inform this process to ensure that the fundamental principle
of non-discrimination is fully implemented for all children
and young people.
Children with Disabilities and Allied Health Therapies
This is another priority area which we feel has been very
specifically and narrowly defined. The NICCY research has
identified children with disabilities as a significant cross-cutting
theme and stated that,
“Protecting and promoting the rights of children with
all forms of disability must be a priority for the Commissioner”
The UNCRC Committee compounds the importance of the protection
of the rights of children with disabilities and states,
“...the Committee is concerned that the principle of
non-discrimination is not fully implemented for all children
in all parts of the State party and that there is unequal
enjoyment of economic, social, cultural, civil and political
rights, in particular for children with disabilities...”
NICCY must continue to challenge the discrimination and inequality
experienced by children with disabilities. The NICCY research
highlights that this must be a particular priority in regard
to health care policies and practices.
The research also confirmed that children with disabilities
were particularly concerned that in many areas of their lives
they did not have a voice. NICCY should develop and promote
new and innovative models of participation to ensure that
children with disabilities can fully participate in decisions
affecting their lives.
Children with Mental Health Issues
Children with mental health issues is very clearly an area
of priority concern in terms of the lack of service provision
in Northern Ireland. The NICCY research highlighted some very
serious concerns in relation to children with mental health
issues and stated that in Northern Ireland over 20% of children
suffer significant mental health problems, comprising the
commonest cause of severe disability in childhood. The research
states that child and adolescent mental health has been neglected
and under-resourced by policy makers and legislators and says,
“Although children under 18 years represent 25% of Northern
Ireland’ s population the proportion of expenditure
on child and adolescent mental health services is less than
5% of the mental health budget. In the context of competing
demands on public services and priorities, children are most
likely to benefit from early intervention and preventive provision.
It is well established that mental ill-health in children
can be avoided through
preventive and early interventions in children’ s lives.”
In relation to mental health, the UNCRC Committee recommended
that the government,
“Take all necessary measures to strengthen its mental
health and counselling services...”
It is obvious that there is an urgent need for increased investment
in mental health services for children and while we recognise
that there is an ongoing Mental Health Review, this is clearly
an area where NICCY should be lobbying for immediate substantial
investment. There have been two judicial reviews taken recently
in respect of the lack of CAMHS services for children and
young people. The NICCY research has highlighted a number
of areas where investment is fundamental, for example, the
development of multi-agency approaches to guarantee appropriate
services to meet the physical and mental health needs of children
and young people; the development of child and adolescent
centred health care services in which children and young people
have the opportunity to fully participate in decisions about
their health care and the urgent provision of fully resourced
and appropriately staffed mental health services for children
in care, secure accommodation and custody throughout Northern
Ireland.
Children and Poverty
Poverty is identified as one of the significant cross-cutting
themes of the NICCY research as a major obstacle in preventing
children and young people from asserting their rights. The
UNCRC Committee expressed its concern at the number of children
living in poverty and the lack of a co-ordinated and effective
strategy for the eradication of poverty. The Committee recommended
that the government,
“...take all necessary measures to the maximum extent
of … available resources to accelerate the elimination
of child poverty
We are aware of and welcome NICCY’s representation on
a steering group set up to inform research being commissioned
by OFMDFM on child poverty. As OFMDFM’s Public Service
Agreement 2005-08 includes a target of halving the number
of children in low income households between 1998-99 and 2010-11,
NICCY will have a key role in acting as a watchdog in terms
of the progress of government in achieving this target and
in lobbying for the development of a specific child poverty
action plan. NICCY clearly also has a role in ensuring that
child poverty is a central issue within both the government’s
anti-poverty and children’s strategies. It is essential
that both these strategies particularly focus on the needs
and rights of those children and families who are most at
risk of severe and persistent poverty. Government policies
must provide a sufficient standard of living to ensure that
families with children can provide them with the basic necessities
and that children do not suffer social exclusion as a result
of lack of income.
Areas which we feel should be included under the heading of
Children and Poverty include Children in Employment and Children
and the Social Security System. There is a very real risk
of economic exploitation of young people aged 16 and 17. While
NICCY mentions the fact that children are discriminated against
because of their age as a result of the National Minimum Wage,
there has been no indication of what action NICCY intends
to take to rectify this direct discrimination. Also, the fact
that young people aged 16 and 17 have no automatic right to
social security benefits and also receive a lower level of
income support and jobseekers allowance than adults over 25,
regardless of the fact that they may be living independently,
has not been addressed by NICCY in the draft priorities. The
NICCY research addressed these areas and states that a key
issue is inadequate benefit provision. This is clearly an
issue both in terms of child poverty and direct discrimination
on the basis of age.
Youth@CLC’s SOS report found that almost 12% (124) of
young people surveyed had issues regarding discrimination
in employment. The majority of these issues related to the
age of legal employment and unequal payment due to age. One
16 year old complained that,
“I am not treated fairly in employment as there are
people older than me earning more for doing the same job”
The same issue arose in the NICCY schools research where young
people rejected lower wages as discriminatory on the basis
of their age.
The UNCRC Committee recommended,
“...that the State party reconsider its policies regarding
the minimum wage for young workers in light of the principle
of non-discrimination.”
Another area highlighted by the NICCY research was in relation
to young people and payment while on a training course. The
research found that,
“Young people who genuinely want to achieve a career
and go on a training course are discriminated against as they
only receive the £40 per week training element (if they
do two days a week at college and on placement three days
per week.). However, others at age 16 who choose to go back
and resit exams are able to get the £30 enhancement
to stay on at school plus the £40 benefit payment. Therefore,
those with a clear career path and motivation are £30
per week worse off.”
There are clearly related issues around child poverty and
homelessness. This is another issue which we feel that NICCY
has not addressed in its draft priorities and believe it warrants
a great deal more attention. A government which tolerates
homeless children is clearly in breach of Articles 6 and 27
of the UNCRC. The NICCY research highlights the impact of
homelessness on the whole child or young person and quotes
Shelter stating,
“The impact of homelessness on children and young people
goes way beyond the simple absence of appropriate housing:
it affects their education, job prospects, social life, relationships
and self esteem. Being homeless or living in poor housing
can adversely affect children and young people’ s mental
health. The negative effects of homelessness on children can
have long term consequences for their lives as adults, placing
an individual at risk for life”
The NICCY research acknowledges that one of the main contributing
factors to homelessness in children and young people is family
or relationship breakdown. This is highlighted by the fact
that one in ten young people will run away or be forced to
leave home overnight before they are sixteen because of problems
at home (Raws, 2001) The research details the knock on effects
to health, education and welfare and illustrates the dangers
of homelessness for children and young people, one the most
vulnerable groups in society. We are of the view that NICCY
should also look at the issue of homelessness in relation
to family matters (see this response - Having your say, page
17)
In relation to child poverty and homelessness, the UNCRC Committee
urged the government,
“(a) To take all necessary measures to the “maximum
extent of … available resources” to accelerate
the elimination of child poverty;
(b) To better coordinate and reinforce its efforts to address
the causes of youth homelessness and its consequences;
(c) To review its legislation and policies concerning benefits
and social security allowances for 16- to 18-year-olds.”
Clearly the issues of employment, social security and homelessness
are areas of priority for NICCY. We believe that NICCY, in
its draft priorities, should address the concerns of the NICCY
research and the recommendations of the UNCRC Committee, as
detailed above, to ensure that children and young people in
Northern Ireland are in receipt of the most basic of human
rights.
Children and the Troubles
The NICCY research has identified the legacy of violent conflict
as a significant cross
cutting theme of the research. It has identified the need
for more research to inform understanding of the long term
effects of political violence on young people to aid a fuller
understanding of the needs of young people, with particular
reference to the high rates of suicides among young men in
North Belfast. This is corroborated by the UNCRC Committee
recommendation urging the government to,
“...undertake studies on the causes and backgrounds
of suicides.”
The research also indicates that the legacy of the conflict
continues to impact on many aspects of the lives of children
and young people in relation to segregation in housing, education
and social spaces and also with regard to paramilitary and
vigilante ‘punishment’ attacks. Sixteen percent
(205) of the children and young people who took part in Youth@clc’s
SOS research felt that paramilitary and sectarian activity
affected their lives. In a visit to Northern Ireland in 2001,
Olara A. Otunnu, the Special Representative of the UN Secretary
General for Children and Armed Conflict, observed the centrality
of children and young people to a durable peace process and
urged Government to ensure that as part of the peace process
the, “pressing basic needs of children,” are addressed.
“The Legacy of the Troubles on the Young People's Psychological
and Social Development and Their School Life” (Muldoon,
Trew and Kilpatrick, 2000) found that despite the interest
of local and international researchers in the psychological
effects of the conflict on children's and adolescents' development,
a firm understanding as to the psychological cost of the troubles
has not been reached. There is clearly a role for NICCY to
carry out research into the ‘cost of the troubles’
on children and young people and to promote and safeguard
the rights of children by lobbying government to ensure that
children are a priority for government in the ongoing peace
process.
We support the NICCY research’s call for a strategy
to address issues related to the impact of the conflict in
Northern Ireland and religious segregation in schools. This
is very much in line with the UNCRC recommendation that the
government,
“Increase the budget for and take appropriate measures
and incentives to facilitate the establishment of additional
integrated schools in Northern Ireland to meet the demand
of a significant number of parents.”
Child Protection
The NICCY research identified a number of major issues of
concern in relation to child protection. These include the
need to invest in structural improvements and to strengthen
the functions of Area Child Protection Committee’s (ACPC’s)
stating that such improvements should include clearer criteria
for significant harm accompanied by a robust assessment framework.
It also called for a co-ordinated strategy for the reduction
of child deaths through violence, to record all crimes committed
against children and to monitor, investigate and prosecute
cases of violence against children.
The UNCRC Committee made a number of related recommendations,
stating,
“In line with its previous recommendations... and in
light of articles 3, 6, 12, 19 and 37 of the Convention, the
Committee recommends that the State party:
(a) Introduce a system of statutory child death inquiries;
(b) Develop a coordinated strategy for the reduction of child
deaths as a result of violence and the reduction of all forms
of violence against children;
(c) Ensure consistent legislative safeguards for all children
in alternative care, including those who are privately fostered;
(d) Carry out large-scale public education campaigns and programmes,
including through the schools, aimed at reducing child deaths
and child abuse with information on the role of statutory
and other services in protecting children;
(e) Establish effective procedures and mechanisms to receive,
monitor, investigate and prosecute instances of abuses, ill-treatment
and neglect, ensuring that the abused child is not victimized
in legal proceedings and that her/his privacy is protected;
(f) Record in the British Crime Survey all crimes committed
against children;
(g) Provide for the care, recovery and reintegration of victims;
(h) Strengthen the reporting system, through full support
for the confidential centres for abused children, and train
teachers, law enforcement officials, care workers, judges
and health professionals in the identification, reporting
and management of cases of ill treatment.”
We note that progress is being made in relation to the follow
up of child deaths through the development of a Child Death
Review Protocol.
While we recognise that there are a number of developments
in the area of child protection, as outlined in the NICCY
research, such as the establishment of a Child Protection
Advisory Group, a statutory basis for ACPC’s, extensive
audits of services delivered by the Boards and Trusts, the
Social Services Inspectorate’s inspection of Trust’s
child protection procedures, the review of the PEC’s
vetting procedures and the possibility of new child protection
legislation in 2005, the research cautions that,
“…careful monitoring is required to determine
the level of their impact.”
NICCY clearly is in an ideal position to ensure independent
monitoring of the new legislation and child protection policies
and to encourage and promote suitable methods of ensuring
the participation and support of children and young people
in all aspects of child protection.
Children and Crime
We are of the view that this priority area is very broadly
defined and covers a huge spectrum of issues, covering areas
such as children as victims of crime, the youth justice system
and policing. As the UNCRC is central to the functions and
role of NICCY, it is fundamental that in relation to children
and crime that the UNCRC Committee recommendations as well
as other relevant international standards, such as the United
Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile
Justice (the Beijing Rules), the United Nations Guidelines
for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (the Riyadh Guidelines),
the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived
of their Liberty and the Vienna Guidelines for Action on Children
in the Criminal Justice System are examined in an effort to
afford children their most basic rights.
The Committee made more critical observations about children
in the youth justice system than in any other area, noting
that,
“...the situation of children in conflict with the law
has worsened since the consideration of the initial report”.
A particular concern for the Committee is the low age of criminal
responsibility. It also criticised the conditions that children
experience in detention with specific concerns including the
use of solitary confinement as a disciplinary measure or for
protection, the lack of access to independent advocacy services
and the fact that children are still not separated from adults
in prison.
Amongst the Committee’s recommendations to government
were to considerably raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility;
to ensure that detention of children is used as a measure
of last resort for the shortest appropriate period of time;
children should be separated from adults in prison; plastic
baton rounds should be abolished as a means of crowd control;
detained children should have the right to independent advocacy
services and to ensure that all children deprived of their
liberty have statutory rights to education, health and child
protection equal to their peers.
The NICCY research makes a number of recommendations based
on the UNCRC Committee’s recommendations and also identifies
the introduction of Anti-social behaviour orders (ASBO’s)
as wholly incompatible with the UNCRC, recommending that they
be withdrawn. We strongly support this recommendation and
the Children’s Law Centre and nine other NGO’s
are currently awaiting the Equality Commission’s Statutory
Duty Investigation’s Committee report on the outcome
of an official investigation into the introduction of ASBO’s.
The High Court judgement of Mr. Justice Girvan serves only
to weaken the interpretation of the UNCRC and as the custodian
and champion of the UNCRC, NICCY must reassert the importance
of the UNCRC and monitor and review the operation of ASBO’s
with a view to further challenging their legality and having
them withdrawn.
The research, while acknowledging the huge amount of progress
required in children’s rights and crime states that
NICCY is in,
“...a strong position to tackle the egregious breaches
faced by these children in a strategic way through awareness
raising, lobbying for change including the full implementation
and incorporation of the CRC and advising Government on the
implications for children’s rights of law and policy
in the area.”
It is our hope that NICCY does indeed, as a matter of urgency,
tackle these breaches, raise awareness and lobby for change
as it is clear that in order to safeguard and promote the
rights and best interests of children and young people within
and in contact with the criminal justice system, there is
much work to be done.
Physical Punishment
It was in respect of the continued use of the defence of ‘reasonable
chastisement’ that the UNCRC Committee was most critical
of the UK government. In relation to the physical punishment
of children, the UNCRC Committee emphasised its “deep
regret” that the government,
“...persists in retaining the defence of reasonable
chastisement and has taken no significant action towards prohibiting
all corporal punishment of children in the family.”
The Committee recommended that the government,
“...with urgency adopt legislation…to remove the
‘reasonable chastisement’ defence and prohibit
all corporal punishment in the family and in other contexts
not covered by existing legislation”.
It also urged the development of,
“...positive, participatory and non-violent forms of
discipline and respect for children’s equal right to
human dignity and physical integrity (and) public education
programmes on the negative consequences of corporal punishment”.
The NICCY research concurs with the Committee’s recommendations
and states that,
“The unequivocal view expressed by the vast majority
of children, young people and adults spoken to for the research
was that all forms of physical punishment should cease.”
We note NICCY’s involvement with the DHSSPS on developing
a family support/positive parenting strategy and recommend
that NICCY continues to enter into discussion with the DHSSPS
and encourage them to move forward with this strategy, with
the participation of children and young people, parents and
advocates, as a priority. NICCY also has an important role
in continuing to lobby the Office of Law Reform for legislative
reform to give children the same legal protection from assault
as adults. It is likely that this will be the key area for
the primary focus of the next UNCRC Committee review and NICCY’s
role in the removal of the defence of ‘reasonable chastisement’
will surely form part of this focus.
Knowing Your Rights and Responsibilities
Similarly to Implementation of the UNCRC and Having Your Say,
we see Knowing Your Rights as one of the initial statutory
priorities which underpin and form the cornerstone of the
work of NICCY. We expressly omit to include ‘responsibilities’
when discussing children’s rights as there is no such
link in the UNCRC or the Order which established NICCY’s
office. We strongly oppose the notion that with rights come
responsibilities and in order to assert your rights, you must
also undertake a set of responsibilities. Furthermore, explicit
reference to ‘responsibilities’ when discussing
children’s rights is, in our view, discriminatory use
of language due to the fact that no other vulnerable group
has their rights qualified in such a manner. We firmly recommend
that the word ‘responsibilities’ be removed from
this priority area to give further clarity and prominence
to the spirit and letter of both the Order and the UNCRC.
There is a clear statutory basis in NICCY’s duty to
ensure that children know their rights, as discussed above.
NICCY has been tasked with an unequivocal duty to promote
an understanding of the rights of children and young persons.
The NICCY research noted the serious information gap in relation
to the rights of children and young people among children
and young people themselves, their parents, families and the
many statutory, non-governmental and professional bodies and
people who work with and for them, both directly and indirectly.
We support the recommendation that NICCY should work to establish
itself as one of the central points for information on children’s
rights in Northern Ireland and believe that this should be
done in partnership with existing organisations with relevant
expertise. NICCY should work strategically to ensure that
all children and young people have effective access to information
about their rights in child sensitive formats and develop,
encourage and promote effective ways to produce and disseminate
child sensitive information across government departments
and statutory agencies.
The starting point in ensuring that children secure their
rights is the development of a societal awareness of the Convention
as knowledge is fundamental to asserting rights. The Committee
was seriously concerned at the lack of awareness among most
children of their rights under the Convention. It pointed
to the need for the government to carry out awareness raising
and training among all sectors of society ranging from children
to law enforcement personnel. In its General Comment No 5
the Committee has indicated that the overall purpose of such
training should be,
“...to emphasise the status of the child as a holder
of human rights, to increase knowledge and understanding of
the Convention and to encourage active respect for all its
provisions”.
Under this priority, NICCY states that ‘some groups’
have shown concern over the current wording of the Draft Bill
of Rights. We are aware that NICCY has also expressed concern
that the NIHRC’s current proposals for children’s
rights protection in the Draft Bill of Rights do not comply
with international children’s rights standards. NICCY
will have a key role to play in ensuring that children’s
rights protections in the Bill of Rights reflect the highest
international human rights standards.
We support the recommendation in the NICCY research, that
NICCY should raise awareness of the Convention and children’s
rights among children and young people and adults, including
those working with and for children, all of whom it identifies
as requiring on-going training on children’s rights.
Implementing the UNCRC
Implementing the UNCRC is another of NICCY’s initial
statutory priorities which underpin and form the cornerstone
of NICCY’s work. Again, there is a clear statutory basis
for NICCY’s work on implementing the UNCRC, as discussed
above, and we feel that, rather than a stand alone priority,
this is the central framework for the work of NICCY and a
fundamental aspect to ensuring that children and young people
in Northern Ireland become real rights holders, with real
rights. Youth@clc expressed similar feelings and argued that
the UNCRC should not be an individual priority, but rather
form the basis throughout, at the heart of the NICCY priorities
and action plan. They highlighted that the UNCRC is essential
to all of the priorities and so should have a section adequately
and thoroughly explaining what it is, what it means for children
and young people today and what the UK government has done
to help implement it.
The vehicle for implementing the UNCRC had clearly been recognised
as the Children and Young People’s Unit’s Draft
Children’s Strategy. There has been a marked movement
away from this and the recent consultation document on the
Draft Strategy states that it will,
“...help Northern Ireland to move closer in line with
the principles and aspirations laid down in the Convention.”
It is fundamental to the development and promotion of children’s
rights in Northern Ireland that the UNCRC is fully implemented
as recommended by the UNCRC Committee which stated that the
government should,
”...expedite the adoption and implementation of a comprehensive
plan of action for the implementation of the Convention through
an open, consultative and participatory process.”
Given the dilution of the initial commitment of implementing
the UNCRC through the Draft Strategy and the imminent deadline
for comment on the consultation on the Draft Strategy, it
is vitally important that NICCY urgently lobbies for the intention
of the Draft Strategy to be returned to its original and for
the Children’s Strategy to provide the mechanism for
full implementation of the UNCRC.
Children and Discrimination
One of the obvious omissions from the NICCY draft priorities
is the area of Children and Discrimination. This flows from
the UNCRC Committee findings that the principle of non-discrimination
is not being implemented for certain groups. The Committee
stated that,
“...there is unequal enjoyment of economic, social,
cultural, civil and political rights, in particular for children
with disabilities, children from poor families, Irish and
Roma travellers’ children, asylum-seeker and refugee
children, children belonging to minority groups, children
in care, detained children and children aged between 16 and
18 years old.”
Many of these groups of children have been addressed in some
of the priorities, but we believe that it is necessary to
reinforce the importance of the inclusion of children who
suffer all forms of discrimination through prioritising a
specific area of work to meet their needs, including promoting
social inclusion, participation and equality of opportunity
for all children in Northern Ireland. Youth@clc felt that
it was very important that children and discrimination be
a individual priority for action and this is reinforced by
the SOS report which found that Twenty two percent (222) of
the children and young people who took part in the survey
highlighted discrimination as a concern for them. While a
strategy already exists in the form of Section 75 to monitor
and address discrimination against children on the grounds
of age, disability and racial group, the lack of data on children’s
lives, combined with a lack of appropriate consultation with
children and young people, has meant that it hasn’t
been possible to effectively assess whether government policies
have an adverse impact on children within these groups. It
will be important for NICCY to lobby to ensure that the Children’s
Strategy identifies particular groups of disadvantaged and
vulnerable children and young people, including those listed
by the Committee and develops appropriate priorities and targets
to tackle the discrimination they face. According to the Committee’s
General Comment No 5 such priorities may necessitate,
“...changes in legislation, administration and resource
allocation as well as educational measures to change attitudes”.
Clearly the proposed Single Equality Bill has significant
potential to provide effective legal protection for children
against all forms of discrimination. This is particularly
important in light of the historical difficulties children
and young people have experienced in availing of protection
under existing anti-discrimination legislation. NICCY will
have a key role in ensuring that the new legislative framework
has at its core children’s rights values and principles
as per the UNCRC.
Education
Youth@clc believes that Education should be a priority for
NICCY. This is also highlighted in Youth@clc’s SOS Report
where it was identified that a large number of children have
a great deal of concerns, Twenty percent (211) of respondents
highlighted issues relating to school which included homework
(4%), fees (1%), exams (6%) and the availability of drugs
in schools. While there are aspects of the education system
within NICCY’s priorities, for example, under ‘Bullying’,
‘Having your say’, ‘Special Educational
Needs and Autism’ and ‘School Transport and Road
Safety’, we are of the view that there would be merit
in having a priority area which deals more broadly with the
area of Education. Issues to consider which are closely aligned
to the CHALKY statistics – see Appendix 2 are Expulsion
and Suspension, Pupil Welfare/Child Protection in Schools,
Admission and Attendance. We are slightly concerned, in light
of our experience, the attached statistics and the NICCY research,
that Education was not identified as a priority area. The
UNCRC Committee made a number of recommendations in relation
to Education, covering areas such as participation, exclusion,
inequalities in education, provision of education for looked
after children, inclusion of human rights and the UNCRC in
school curricula, increased funding for the provision of more
integrated schools, the development of education programmes
for teenage mothers and examination of the impact on children
through the privatisation of schools. The NICCY research devotes
an entire chapter to the area of education, compounding the
importance of this area in the field of children’s rights
and makes the following conclusions and recommendations;
• Children with special educational needs should have
learning their educational needs assessed promptly and appropriate
educational provision made for them.
• All staff should be adequately trained in identifying
and managing bullying behaviour; incidents should be properly
monitored and recorded; and appropriate support should be
put in place for all children involved.
• Children educated outside mainstream schools must
have access to high quality, full-time education.
• Children’ s views must be given due weight in
all decisions affecting them, through (a) the enactment of
a statutory obligation on schools and other professionals
working in education to take pupils’ views into account
and (b) training and support for all staff in relation to
the implementation of Article 12 of the CRC.
• There must be a strategy to secure equal access to
effective education for Traveller children.
• There should be a concerted strategy to address issues
relating to the impact of the conflict and religious segregation
in schools.
While some of these issues will be dealt with under other
priority areas, there is clearly a need for education to be
addressed in a more strategic manner. We believe that NICCY
should give consideration to education as a priority area
in its own right.
Restraint and Seclusion
One area which we suggest that NICCY makes a priority is in
relation to the restraint and seclusion of children and young
people. The UNCRC Committee was particularly concerned at
the fact that between April 2000 and February 2002, 296 children
sustained injuries as a result of restraints and measures
of control applied in prison. In addition, the Committee expressed
concern at the frequent use of physical restraint in residential
institutions and in custody, as well as at the placement of
children in juvenile detention and in solitary confinement
in prisons. The Committee recommended that
“ ...the State party to review the use of restraints
and solitary confinement in custody, education, health and
welfare institutions throughout the State party to ensure
compliance with the Convention, in particular articles 37
and 25.”
The NICCY research also makes a restraint and seclusion a
priority and recommends that NICCY address this area as a
matter of urgency as a result of the UN Committee’s
special attention to this area. The research recommends that
the use of restraint in custodial and care settings should
be reviewed and solitary confinement should be abolished.
While we are aware of the draft guidelines on restraint and
seclusion which have been produced by the DHSSPS, it is important
that the recommendations of the UNCRC Committee are addressed
in full and a review is carried out. NICCY should be lobbying
the government to carry out this review in an effort to ensure
compliance with the UNCRC.
Looked After Children
The UNCRC makes extensive provision for the rights of children
and young people to a family, in the family, on family breakdown
or where alternative care is needed to ensure the child’s
care and protection. Every child’s rights in this area
must be secured in full compliance with the Convention’s
fundamental provisions of non-discrimination (Art. 2), best
interests of the child (Art. 3) and the right to be involved
in decision making which concerns the child (Art. 12). We
feel that this should be a priority area for NICCY and recommend
that NICCY gives much more consideration and priority to ‘looked
after children’. The UNCRC Committee makes a number
of recommendations in relation to ‘looked after children’
including, ensuring consistent legislative safeguards for
all children in alternative care, including those who are
privately fostered, carrying out large-scale public education
campaigns and programmes, including through the schools, aimed
at reducing child deaths and child abuse with information
on the role of statutory and other services in protecting
children and establishing effective procedures and mechanisms
to receive, monitor, investigate and prosecute instances of
abuses, ill-treatment and neglect.
The NICCY research makes similar recommendations in the area
of ‘looked after children’. It highlights that
fact that within the area of family life and alternative care
there are a number of areas where existing provision from
a children right’ s perspective is under review, consultation
or in the process of reform. While these various changes should
result in significant improvements in children’s rights
and welfare. NICCY should get involved in these reforms and
consultation processes to argue from a children’s rights
perspective and to ensure that, in this very critical area,
the UNCRC and affording basic rights to ‘looked after
children’ is firmly on the agenda. NICCY should also
monitor these changes to ensure that they are implemented
effectively and are accompanied by the anticipated raising
of standards as outlined by the UNCRC Committee.
Conclusion
Both the Children’s Law Centre and Save the Children
are delighted to have the opportunity to comment on the NICCY
Draft Priorities and Draft Corporate Plan. We look forward
to working in partnership with NICCY and are excited at the
prospect of working with NICCY to promote and safeguard the
rights and best interests of all children and young people
in Northern Ireland. We hope that our comments have been constructive
and useful to NICCY and are more than happy to meet with NICCY
staff to discuss anything in this response. We wish to be
kept fully informed of progress in the development of the
NICCY priorities and Corporate Plan look forward to the issues
raised being addressed, taken forward by NICCY and hearing
from NICCY in the near future.
The Unicef Innocenti Digest in, “The Aims and Functions
of Independent Human Rights Institutions for Children”
(June 2001) outlines four key functions, which are broadly
consistent with the statutory functions of NICCY and the Paris
Principles. These are,
1. Influencing policy makers and practitioners to take greater
account of the human rights of children – If a human
rights institution is to advocate for children’s rights,
it must identify and highlight ways in which current law,
policy and practice fail to respect those rights, and propose
measures to address those failures. Because the CRC is a comprehensive
treaty addressing not only civil and political rights, but
also social, economic and cultural rights, the protection
of all of these rights would need to be incorporated into
the mandate of the institution. The institution could promote
respect for the four principles of the Convention (Arts. 2,3,6,12)
by – analysing law, policy and practice to assess compliance
with the CRC, undertaking inquiries and producing reports
on any aspect of policy or practice affecting children, commenting
on proposed new legislation and undertaking formal investigations.
2. Promoting respect for the views of the child – Article
12 of the CRC embodies the principle that children have the
right to express their views and have them taken seriously
in all matters affecting them. The right to be heard is a
procedural right which is fundamental to the exercise of substantive
rights. Human rights institutions for children have a clear
responsibility to promote implementation of Article 12 by
ensuring that their work is directly informed by the views
of children, ensuring that these views are reflected in reports
to government, proposals etc, establishing structures through
which children’s views could be directly and effectively
represented to other bodies, monitoring compliance with Article
12, promoting and disseminating models of good practice and
providing a source of expertise and support to government
in developing more effective mechanisms for promoting children’s
active participation.
3. Raising awareness of child rights among children and adults
– Awareness raising is an integral part of the process
of enhancing respect for human rights as rights have little
relevance if no-one knows about them or understands them.
This could be done by – producing and disseminating
information about children’s rights, compiling and analysing
data on children, incorporating human rights into the school
curriculum, using the media, training professionals and hosting
events to increase awareness.
4. Ensuring that children have effective means of redress
when their rights are violated – Children must have
access to mechanisms for challenging violations of their rights.
One of the most important functions of a human rights institution
for children must be to ensure that such access exists. Two
general models have evolved to fulfil this role – advocating
for individual children and advocating for children as a group.
Regardless of the model chosen, a human rights institution
for children must monitor the availability, effectiveness
and usage of existing complaints procedures, identify gaps
in the provision of complaints procedures and analyse the
findings from children’s complaints to identify patterns
of concern and feed these into policy proposals and recommendations
for change.
* This article and the aims and functions outlined in it are
based on the UNCRC’s General Comment 2 (2002)
INCLUDED IN HARD COPY ONLY - CANNOT E-MAIL STATISTICS
|
|
|
|
