The role of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child in the follow-up of its decisions on communications


Master's Thesis, 2017

61 Pages, Grade: A


Excerpt

Table of contents

Dedication

Acknowledgement

Abbreviations

Table of contents

Chapter one
General introduction
1.1. Background to the study
1.2. Statement of the problem
1.3. Research questions
1.3. Literature review
1.4. Methodology
1.5. Limitations of the study
1.6. Structure
1.7. Clarification of terms
1.7.1. Child
1.7.2. Follow-up
1.7.3. Implementation
1.7.4. Compliance
1.7.5. Communication

Chapter two
Jurisprudential contributions of the communications decided by the African Children’s Committee
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Case of the children of Nubian descent in Kenya
2.3. Northern Uganda case
2.4. Talibe case
2.5. Malawian case
2.6. Conclusion

Chapter three
The African Children’s Committee’s follow-up on the implementation of its decisions on communications
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Legal framework for the African Children’s Committee’s follow-up
3.3. Follow-up measures undertaken by the African Children’s Committee’s
3.3.1. Country visits
3.3.2. Implementation hearings
3.3.3. Forum on implementation of the African Children’s Charter
3.4. Cooperation with CSOs
3.5. Conclusion

Chapter four
Challenges to the African Children’s Committee’s follow-up on the implementation of its decisions on Communications
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Lack of clarity and precision in the African Children’s Committee’s decisions
4.3. Approach adopted during the communications process
4.4. Low level/quality of state representation at implementation hearings
4.5. Lack of child participation
4.6. Weak disaggregated data collection and analysis system
4.7. Collaboration with NHRIs and other national follow-up mechanisms
4.8. Conclusion

Chapter five
Conclusion and recommendations
5.1. Introduction
5.2. Conclusion
5.3. Recommendations

Bibliography

Dedication

This work is dedicated to Dr./Mr. and Mrs. Linus Mofor.

Acknowledgement

First and foremost, I acknowledge the invaluable contributions of my supervisor, Professor Benyam Dawit Mezmur. Working with him on this research has been very enriching and his invaluable input as my supervisor in the course of this exercise played an indispensable role towards the successful completion of this work. Learning from him has also left me with a stronger aspiration to engage in further research.

Also, I am highly indebted to the staff of the Secretariat of the African Children’s Committee. The support they offered me during my internship at their office, while I was conducting this research motivated me to forge ahead. They were extremely helpful when it came to searching for reports and other documents on follow-up activities previously carried out by the African Children’s Committee.

In addition, I wish to acknowledge the Director of the Centre for Human Rights and the rest of its staff for making it possible for me to enjoy this unique opportunity of going through this LLM and for encouraging me to think critically about the promotion and protection of human rights in Africa.

I am equally grateful to my mates in the 2017 LLM class for the though provoking exchanges we had throughout this program and which helped me develop some of the ideas reflected in this dissertation. Finally, I sincerely appreciate everyone who, in one way or the other, contributed towards the successful realization of this research.

Abbreviations

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Chapter one

General introduction

1.1. Background to the study

The African Union (AU) has put in place a robust and comprehensive framework for the promotion and protection of Children’s rights in Africa.1 This was achieved in 1990 with the adoption of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (African Children’s Charter).2 The African human rights system is the only regional system that has a child rights instrument. The African Children’s Charter addresses issues that are specific to the African child.3 The African Children’s Charter entered into force on 29 November 1999. As at the time of conducting this study, the African Children’s Charter had been ratified by 48 African states, whiles even others are yet to ratify same.4 The African states that are yet to ratify the Charter are: Democratic Republic of Congo, Kingdom of Morocco, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Republic of Somalia, Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe, Republic of South Sudan, and Republic of Tunisia.5

The African Children’s Charter binds member states to principles similar to those enshrined in the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), but goes a step further to address a number of issues that specifically affect children in the African context. As Sloth-Nielsen puts it, the African Children’s Charter is the ‘principle framework’ for addressing child protection in the African regional context.6

The African Children’s Charter is structured into four chapters: chapter one deals with the substantive provisions on the protection of the rights and welfare of the child,7 chapter two establishes the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (African Children’s Committee),8 chapter three lays down the mandate and procedure of the African Children’s Committee,9 and chapter four relates to the miscellaneous provisions. According to Wachira and Ayinyla, ‘a human rights guarantee is only as good as its supervision.’10

The African Children’s Committee is established under the African Children’s Charter as an elected oversight body charged with supervising the implementation of the African Children’s Charter. The African Children’s Committee consists of 11 Experts who are nominated by the governments of African states and elected by the Assembly of Heads of State of the African Union. The 11 experts elected to serve on the African Children’s Committee are expected to do so for a five-year term.11 The African Children’s Charter requires these 11 experts to serve on the Committee in their individual capacity.12 The functions of the African Children’s Committee are laid down in article 42 of the African Children’s Charter. The Committee generally meets twice per calendar year and is supported by a Secretariat hosted by the Department of Social Affairs within the African Union Commission.

The African Children’s Committee has both a promotional and a protective mandate. In furtherance of its mandates, the African Children’s Committee conducts the state reporting procedure, considers communications against state parties and investigates matters falling within the purview of the African Children’s Charter.13 In conformity with its promotional mandate, the African Children’s Committee undertakes promotional visits to states in order to lobby for the ratification and implementation of the African Children’s Charter.14 As argued by Mezmur, the promotional visits undertaken by the African Children’s Committee in 2004 ‘yielded some positive results’ in relation to the ratification of the African Children’s Charter.15 As part of its promotional mandate, the African Children’s Committee always champions the celebration of the Day of the African Child and uses this as an opportunity to promote the African Children’s Charter.16

The protective mandate of the African Children’s Committee largely relates to the consideration of communications submitted against state parties. In the last few years, the African Children’s Committee has undoubtedly made progress, particularly with respect to its protective mandate. This is clearly reflected in the progressive decisions that the African Children’s Committee has issued following its consideration of a number of communications. As Viljoen puts it, ‘the Committee has clearly taken significant strides forward... and overcome some of the challenges it seemingly faced at the outset’.17 The progress made by the African Children’s Committee in the promotion and protection of the rights of the child on the African continent cannot be overstated.

Several communications have been submitted to the African children’s Committee, some of which failed the admissibility test. Communications that are declared admissible are eventually considered on their merits and the African Children’s Committee issues a decision based on its findings. The African Children’s Committee has so far issued decisions on four of the communications that have been submitted to it.18 In instances where the African Children’s Committee finds a violation or violations after having considered a communication that was submitted to it, it usually issues a decision which often involves recommendations on appropriate measures to remedy such violations.

Owing to the fact that the African Children’s Committee is simply a quasi-judicial mechanism, its decisions only contain non-binding recommendations. The African Children’s Charter therefore does not make any provision for the judicial enforcement of decisions of the African Children’s Committee. The African Children’s Committee has so far issued three of such decisions in No. 001/Com/001/2005- MicheloHansungule& Others (on behalf of children in Northern Uganda) v The Government of Uganda (the Northern Uganda case) ; No 002/Com/002/2009- Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and Open Society Justice Initiative on behalf of children of Nubian descent in Kenya v The Government of Kenya (the case of the children of Nubian descent) ; No 003/Com/001/2012 - Centre for Human Ri ghts (University of Pretoria) and la Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l ’ H omme (Senegal) v The Government of Senegal (the Talibe case). Interestingly, the African Children’s Committee took a different approach in No. 004/Com/001/2014 - Institute for Human Right and Development in Africa v The Government of Malawi (the Malawian case). In this case an amicable settlement was reached between the parties under the auspices of the African Children’s Committee, without going through the usual communications procedure that had been followed in cases previously decided by the African Children’s Committee.19

Once the African Children’s Committee issues a decision on the merits of a communication, it is usually required that the state party concerned implements the decision by complying with the recommendations in the decision. Subsequent to the issuance of such decisions, the African Children’s Committee engages in the follow-up of its decisions. This is evidenced by the fact that state parties are required to report to the African Children’s Committee on the implementation of its decision within 180 days or six months from the date of receipt of a decision.20 It has been the practice of the African children’s Committee to specifically mention, in its decisions, the prescribed time limit for reporting on the implementation its decisions on communications.21

The African Children’s Committee, unlike some other global and regional human rights bodies, operates without an institutionalised follow-up system to ensure the implementation of its decisions. This notwithstanding, there have been some follow-up measures undertaken by the African Children’s Committee with respect to communications which have already been decided by it so far. The African Children’s Committee has so far adopted a variety of approaches to the follow-up of its decisions.

The follow-up by the African Children’s Committee has a huge potential that could be leveraged in order to accelerate the implementation process and increase compliance by state parties, failing which it would be sending a signal that its decisions and possibly the entire communications process do not matter. This work therefore examines the role played by the African Children’s Committee in the follow-up of its decisions on communications, highlights the challenges to this follow-up process and proposes some recommendations with a view to securing the effectiveness of the African Children’s Committee’s follow-up on its decisions on communications.

1.2. Statement of the problem

The African Children’s Committee is the principal body that oversees the implementation of the African Children’s Charter. The activities of the African Children’s Committee are conducted in accordance with the African Children’s Charter, as well as a number of guidelines and rules of procedure adopted that it has adopted.22 In line with its legal framework, the African Children’s Charter and the Rules of Procedure, the African Children’s Committee has so far decided three communications on their merits and has one amicable settlement agreement that was negotiated under its auspices.23

It does not suffice to simply pass decisions on communications and issue recommendations to state parties. The implementation of and compliance with such decisions issued by human rights treaty bodies is essential for the promotion and protection of children’s rights in particular and human rights in general. Follow-up by treaty bodies largely contributes to ensuring that states implement and comply with decisions on communications.

States’ non-compliance with the African Children’s Committee’s decisions on communications is one of the major challenges it faces with its protective mandate. The African Children’s Committee approached the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Court) with a request for advisory opinion on the standing of the African Children’s Committee before the African Court and in this request the problem of non-compliance was specifically highlighted.24 It was hoped that granting the African Children’s Committee’s access to the African Court could help address the compliance issues. However the African Court issued an unfavourable decision, in which it held that ‘the African Children’s Rights Committee did not have standing to submit contentious cases to the Court as it was not among the organs listed in the Court Protocol’.25 This leaves the African Children’s Committee without any possibility of recourse to a judicial procedure for the enforcement of its decisions. The follow-up process is therefore of vital importance for the implementation of the African Children’s Committee’s decisions on communications, since it has no direct judicial means to enforce its decisions on communications.

The African Children’s Committee has therefore undertaken some measures to follow-up on the implementation of its decisions on communications. However, the African Children’s Committee’s follow-up on the implementation of its decisions is still confronted by a number of challenges. These challenges, for the most part, tend to frustrate the follow-up efforts made by the African Children’s Committee to ensure that state parties implement and comply with its decisions on communications.

1.3. Research questions

The main research question is: what role is the African Children’s Committee taking in relation to the follow-up of its decisions on communications?

The sub - research questions for this study are as follows:

- What are the jurisprudential contributions of the communications decided by the African Children’s Committee?
- How has the African Children’s Committee followed up on the implementation of its decisions on communications?
- What are the challenges with respect to the follow-up by African Children’s Committee?

1.3. Literature review

The concepts of follow-up, implementation and compliance are distinct but also involved some activities that are interlinked. The distinction between them is often blurred or misunderstood by victims of human rights violations, civil society organisations, the media and other commentators, as well as sometimes by the human rights treaty bodies themselves.26

Unlike implementation and compliance which largely depend on the actions of state parties, the follow-up process is more open in the sense that it may involves other actors. It has been found that some of the different actors often involved in the follow-up process include treaty bodies, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs).27 It is important to note that it is not the exclusive duty of any particular actor to carry out follow-up and the combined efforts of the various actors tends to influence state compliance with human rights obligations. However, treaty bodies play an extremely important role in the follow-up process and could eventually set the pace for other stakeholders to follow.

The ratification of human rights treaties does not necessarily guarantee the respect for human rights and the implementation of the decisions of human rights treaty bodies. There are a variety of reasons that explain states’ failure to implement or comply with the decisions of international human rights treaty bodies, some of which include: the lack of political will; resource constraints, the binding and non-binding nature of human rights treaty bodies’ recommendations, as well as other competing national interests.28

Viljoen and Louw, while using the example of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Commission), point out that one of the major reasons for non- compliance is ‘political unwillingness’ on the part of state parties.29 Wachira also lays emphasis on the fact that political will is crucial to the implementation of the decisions of human rights treaty bodies and without the requisite political will, compliance can hardly be guaranteed.30

In spite of the fact that the political will state parties has been found to be a decisive factor in the implementation of and compliance with the decisions of human rights treaty bodies, it is not a ‘magic wand’.31 Implementation as such does not depend exclusively on the political will of state parties. There are other aspects that need to be addressed in order to enhance human rights implementation and compliance, one of which is the issue of follow-up.

Follow-up has been found to be important, because it has a huge potential to influence implementation and also nurture the much needed political will.32 In as much as it is the primary duty of state parties to implement the decisions of human rights treaty bodies, this cannot be regarded as the exclusive preserve of state parties only. This is because follow-up by other non- state actors is needed to enhance state parties’ implementation of the decisions of human rights treaty bodies. Murray and Long argue that follow-up and implementation requires a ‘multi-tiered approach and a coalition of actors’ at both national and international levels.33

The follow-up by non-state actors could involve both treaty-based mechanisms and non- treaty based mechanisms. Human rights treaty bodies can play a very important role in the follow-up on the implementation of their own decisions.34 Non-treaty based mechanisms such as NHRIs and NGOs also engage in follow-up. NHRIs, in accordance with their role and functions elaborated in the Paris Principles,35 can play a pivotal role in the follow-up on decisions of human rights treaty bodies. Similarly, NGOs are also important actors within the follow-up process.36

The role played by human rights treaty bodies in the follow-up process is very crucial to improving states’ compliance with decisions on communications. This is achieved through various means and more importantly through the ‘carrot and stick’ approach, as well as constructive dialogue between the treaty body mechanisms and state parties.37 Human rights treaty bodies, through their follow-up procedures, have a huge potential to enhance states’ compliance with their decisions. The absence of such follow-up by human rights treaty bodies is often associated with greater uncertainty about compliance with human rights treaty bodies’ decisions on communications.38

Some studies have shown that the non-compliance or low compliance with the decisions of human rights treat bodies like the African Commission is largely due to the lack of proper follow-up by the African Commission and have called for the establishment of’ institutionalised follow-up mechanisms in order to enhance states’ compliance with decisions on communications.39 Previous research on the implementation of recommendations issued by the African Commission therefore reveals the need for follow-up by treaty bodies in order to improve implementation and compliance. In the same vein, Eno argues that:

Unlike other regional and global human rights bodies, the Commission has not developed any follow-up mechanism to ensure implementation of its recommendations. . . . This has been very frustrating especially for the victims who have to pursue the execution of the decisions on their own. Because there is no pressure from the Commission, states have tended to turn a blind eye to the recommendations and a deaf ear to the victims' pleas for compliance.40

The pressure mounted on state parties by human rights treaty bodies is needed to influence implementation of decisions on communications. The importance of follow-up by human rights treaty bodies therefore cannot be overstated. It is an important issue that must be addressed in order to improve on human rights implementation and compliance, particularly within the African human rights system.

As regards the follow-up and implementation of the decisions of the African human rights treaty bodies, previous research on compliance has focused principally on the African Commission.41 Not much attention has been paid to the follow-up done by the African Children’s Committee and the challenges faced in this regard. This could largely be attributed to the fact that the African Children’s Committee is not only a relatively younger body than the African Commission and African Court, but has decided approximately less than a percentage of the number of communications that the Commission and African court have dealt with.

This work therefore makes a contribution to knowledge by highlighting the role that the African Children’s Committee is taking relation to the follow-up of its decisions on communications and the attendant challenges to its follow-up process. This work also proposes recommendations that could help circumvent these challenges, improve the African Children’s Committee’s follow-up and ultimately enhance the implementation of the African Children’s Charter, particularly through state compliance with decisions on communications.

1.4. Methodology

This is a qualitative study that makes use of secondary sources of data. The secondary data is gotten through a desk-based review of diverse sources of information such as, legal texts, books, journal articles, newspaper articles, reports and other literature based on broad research pertaining to the work of the African Children’s Committee.

The study also draws some lessons from the experiences of other international human rights treaty bodies with respect to the issue of follow-up on decisions on communications, while highlighting the challenges to follow-up within the African Children’s Committee.

1.5. Limitations of the study

Although this research was carefully conducted, the researcher acknowledges that there are some unavoidable limitations. One major challenge is that this research was conducted only within a period of three months. Three months is hardly enough time for the researcher to exhaustively investigate all of the follow-up that is being done by the African Children’s Committee. It would have been better if this study was conducted over a longer period of time.There is also a lack of literature that specifically dwells on and sufficiently deals with the follow-up and implementation of the African Children’s Committee’s decisions on communications.

1.6. Structure

This study consists of five chapters. Chapter one presents a general introduction to the study which includes: a brief background to the study; statement of the problem; research questions; objectives of the study; significance of the study; literature review; methodology and limitations of the study. Chapter two offers an analysis of the jurisprudential contributions of the communications decided by the African Children’s Committee. Chapter three examines the follow-up measures undertaken by the African Children’s Committee with respect to its decided communications. Chapter four highlights the challenges with respect to the follow-up by African Children’s Committee. This chapter also draws lessons from some of the follow-up measures used by other human rights treaty bodies. Chapter five presents a conclusion and puts forward some recommendations.

1.7. Clarification of terms

1.7.1. Child

The African Children’s Charter defines a ‘child’ as, ‘every human being below the age of 18’.42

1.7.2. Follow-up

According to Murray and Long, follow-up is that ‘process by which a treaty body, political body or other actor monitors and seeks information on what steps have been taken by the state following the delivery of a finding.’43

1.7.3. Implementation

Murray and Long also regard the implementation of decisions as the ‘process by which states take measures at the national level to address issues of concern raised by the human rights treaty bodies in their decisions’.44 The implementation of the decisions of human rights treaty bodies is therefore considered to be the primary responsibility of state parties.

1.7.4. Compliance

Hillebrecht considers human rights compliance, to be states’ implementation of the decisions of human rights treaty bodies.45 Hillebrecht therefore equates compliance to implementation. Some works on human rights compliance adopt a somewhat broader approach to compliance, but for the purpose of this research, the approach adopted is this narrower one which equates compliance to implementation.

1.7.5. Communication

A ‘communication’ refers to any complaint received by the African Children’s Committee in accordance with article 44 of the African Children’s Charter.46

Chapter two

Jurisprudential contributions of the communications decided by the African Children’s Committee

2.1. Introduction

The African Children’s Charter establishes the African Children’s Committee as the treaty body mechanism with the primary responsibility to promote and protect the rights and welfare of the child.47 The African Children’s Committee therefore monitors the implementation of the African Children’s Charter. The African Children’s Committee, in furtherance of it protective mandate, receives and considers communications relating to that are dealt with under the African Children’s Charter.48 Through its decisions on communications the African Children’s Committee is in a very good position to address many of the child rights violations that occur in many parts of Africa.49

The added value of the communication procedure of the African Children’s Committee is that it offers an opportunity to highlight specific violations, create direct engagement with victims and other stakeholders while proposing recommendations to remedy violations found and prevent future violations of children’s rights in Africa. Even though communications are on ‘individual cases’ they also have implications for similar situations experienced by other countries and children that are not necessarily parties to a particular communication.

The African Children’s Committee has, at the time of writing, considered three communications and issued a decision on the merits of each of them. These are: the case of the children of Nubian descent in Kenya; the Northern Uganda case and the Talibe case. The fourth case , the Malawian case, was resolved through an amicable settlement. These decisions constitute major jurisprudential contributions to child law in Africa and the interpretation of the African Children’s Charter. The African Children’s Committee’s decisions on communications now serve as one of the most authoritative region-specific precedents on children’s rights in Africa.

This chapter analyses the jurisprudential contributions of each of these communications in order to provide justification as to why the African Children’s Committee should follow-up on the implementation of these decisions. The analyses in this chapter further highlight the implications of the African Children’s Committee’s approach to these communications on its follow-up on the decisions. This chapter answers the first sub-research question and sets the basis to answer the other two sub-research questions through the discussions – in the subsequent chapters – on the African Children’s Committee’s follow-up and the challenges it faces in this regard.

2.2. Case of the children of Nubian descent in Kenya

The case of the children of Nubian descent in Kenya,50 the second communication that was submitted to the African Children’s Committee after the Northern Uganda case, makes significant jurisprudential contributions and serves as a strong precedent for the protection of the rights and welfare of the child in Africa.51 Although this communication was the second to be submitted to African Children’s Committee it was the very first to be decided. This communication was jointly submitted by the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and the Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI) on behalf of children of Nubian descent in Kenya against the government of Kenya.

The Nubians in Kenya descended from the Nuba Mountains in Sudan, but today they find themselves in Kenya because of the manipulations of the British colonial administration. IHRDA and OSJI, in their complaint to the African Children’s Committee, alleged that the British colonial authorities allocated the Kibera area in Kenya as settlement for the Nubian descents but this was not accompanied by Kenyan citizenship. The Kenyan authorities have eventually followed this same path by not recognising these Nubian descents as Kenyan citizens.

A major difficulty arising out of this situation has been the inability of Nubian descents in Kenya to register the birth of their children, hence the issue of statelessness.52 It is clearly indicated on Kenyan birth certificates that ‘[p]ossession of a birth certificate does not constitute proof of nationality’.53 It follows therefore that the children of Nubian descent in Kenya have the double burden of struggling to overcome the challenges of birth registration, as well as the challenges of acquiring the Kenyan nationality. Consequently many of the children of Nubian descent in Kenya tend to be stateless or risk being stateless.

At 18 years of age, all Kenyans are required by law to be registered as citizens and be issued with a national identity card as proof of such citizenship. For many decades, children of Nubian descent in Kenya have suffered from discrimination in access to nationality and in some cases statelessness. All other Kenyan children have a legitimate expectation of obtaining an identity card at the age of 18 years, thanks to the security of their parents’ citizenship, whereas children of Nubian descent in Kenya cannot boast of having the same expectation because their parents’ citizenship is deemed to be suspect.

In this regard, IHRDA and OSJI, in their complaint and submissions to the African Children’s Committee, based their case on alleged violations of five of the rights protected under the African Children’s Charter. The rights which IHRDA and OSJI alleged had been violated are: the right to freedom from discrimination;54 the right to nationality;55 the right to education;56 the right to health care and services;57 and the right to adequate housing.58 This communication was processed and considered by the African Children’s Committee in accordance with its rules and procedures. The African Children’s Committee, in its decision on this communication, found the government of Kenya to be in violation of the rights which had been indicated by the complainants.59

Nationality and statelessness have been and continue to be contested areas of international human rights law.60 While the right to acquire a nationality is firmly established in several international instruments, including the African Children’s Charter,61 there have been challenges with the application and enforcement of this right. The CRC also recognises the right nationality and it stipulates that every child has a right to acquire a nationality, and that this right should be implemented ‘in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless.’62 There is therefore no doubt that children’s right to a nationality is very crucial, not only in order to prevent statelessness but also as a basis for guaranteeing children’s access to basic services in a country. This decision of the African Children’s Committee is a lead decision within the African human rights system that clearly addressed the issue of nationality for children. This decision is also an indication of the fact that litigation before treaty bodies could be a very useful tool in influencing national entities to uphold the rights of children to a nationality, and combat statelessness in Africa.

[...]


1 African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child of 1990.

2 African Union Commission ‘African Charter on the rights and Welfare of the

Child<https://www.au.int/web/en/treaties/african-charter-rights-and-welfare-child/> (accessed 7 May 2017).

3 A Lloyd ‘Evolution of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child and the African Committee of Experts: Raising the gauntlet’ (2002 ) 10 International Journal of Children’s Rights 180.

4 African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights ‘Ratification table: African Charter on the rights and Welfare of the Child<http://www.achpr.org/instruments/child/ratification/> (accessed 7 May 2017).

5 African Children’s Committee ‘Countries that have not ratified’ <http://www.acerwc.org/ratification-data/> (accessed 7 May 2017).

6 J Sloth-Nielsen ‘Regional framework for safeguarding children: The role of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child’ (2014) 3 Social Sciences 951.

7 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) arts 1 - 31.

8 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) arts 32 - 41.

9 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) arts 42 - 45.

10 GM Wachira & A Ayinla ‘Twenty years of elusive enforcement of the recommendations of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights: A possible remedy’ (2006) 6 African Human Rights Law Journal 466.

11 J Sloth-Nielsen (n 6 above) 953.

12 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 3(2).

13 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) arts 43 - 45.

14 BD Mezmur ‘The African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child: An update’ (2006) 6 African Human Rights Law Journal 565.

15 As above.

16 The Day of the African Child is celebrated every 16 July. This day was instituted by a decision of the OAU Council of Ministers, see OAU Doc CM/Res.1290(LII).

17 F Viljoen International human rights law in Africa 2nded (2012) 408.

18 African Committee of Experts on the rights and Welfare of the Child ‘Table of communications’<http://www.acerwc.org/communications/table-of-communications/> (accessed 8 May 2017).

19 African Committee of Experts on the rights and Welfare of the Child ‘Table of communications’<http://www.acerwc.org/communications/> (accessed 10 May 2017).

20 Revised Guidelines for the Consideration of Communications of 2014, sec XXI.

21 Com/1/2005 – Michelo Hansungule & Others (on behalf of children in Northern Uganda) v The Government of Uganda para 81(6);Com/002/2009 - Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and Open Society Justice Initiative on behalf of children of Nubian descent in Kenya v The Government of Kenya para 69(5); Com/001/2012 - Centre for Human Rights (University of Pretoria) and la Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (Senegal) v Government of Senegal para 82(n).

22 African Children’s Committee Rules of Procedure of 2002; Revised Guidelines for the Consideration of Communications; Guidelines for the Conduct of Investigations.

23 African Committee of Experts on the rights and Welfare of the Child ‘Table of communications’<http://www.acerwc.org/communications/table-of-communications/> (accessed 10 May 2017).

24 In the matter of request for advisory opinion by the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child on the standing of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child before the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Request 002/2013, advisory opinion, 5 December 2014 para 81; Report on the twenty-seventh session of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, 02-06 May 2016 Addis-Ababa, Ethiopia, ACERWC/Rpt (XXVII) Original: English para 93.

25 Killander M ‘Human rights developments in the African Union during 2014’ (2015) 15 African Human Rights Law Journal 552.

26 R Murray & D Long The implementation of the findings of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2015) 28.

27 Human Rights Implementation Centre University of Bristol ‘Follow-Up and Implementation of Decisions by Human Rights Treaty Bodies’<http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/research/centres themes/hric/hricdocs/semrep2009.pdf> (accessed 15May 2017).

28 F Viljoen & L Louw ‘The status of the findings of the African Commission: From moral persuasion to legal obligation’ (2004) 48 Journal of African Law 2.

29 F Viljoen & L Louw (n 28 above) 3.

30 GM Wachira & A Ayinla (n 10 above) 490.

31 Human Rights Implementation Centre University of Bristol ‘Follow-Up and Implementation of Decisions by Human Rights Treaty Bodies’<http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/research/centres- themes/hric/hricdocs/semrep2009.pdf> (accessed 20May 2017).

32 As above.

33 R Murray & D Long (n 26 above) 35.

34 For example, one of the follow-up procedures established by the Human Rights Committee (HRC) is a Special Rapporteur on Follow-up to Views. This was established under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Rule 101 Rules of Procedure, CCPR/C/3/Rev.10. Photini Pazartzis is a Committee Member and the current Interim Rapporteur on Follow-Up to Views.

35 The Paris Principles were adopted in 1991 and endorsed by a resolution of the General Assembly, UN.Doc. A/RES.48/134, of 20 December 1993.

36 Human Rights Implementation Centre University of Bristol ‘Follow-Up and Implementation of Decisions by Human Rights Treaty Bodies’ <http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/research/centres- themes/hric/hricdocs/semrep2009.pdf> (accessed 20May 2017).

37 As above.

38 R Murray ‘The African Charter on Human and Peoples’Rights1987 – 2000: An overview of its progress and problems (2001) 1 African Human Rights Law Journal 10.

39 GM Wachira & A Ayinla (n 10 above) 491; R Eno The place of the African Commission in the new African d ispensation’ (2002) 11 African Security Review 63.

40 R Eno The place of the African Commission in the new African d ispensation’ (2002) 11 African Security Review 67.

41 R Murray & D Long (n 26 above); F Viljoen & L Louw (n 28 above); GM Wachira & A Ayinla (n 10 above).

421990 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 2.

43 R Murray & D Long (n 26 above) 30.

44 R Murray & D Long (n 26 above) 27.

45 C Hillebrecht Domestic politics and international human rights tribunals: The problem of Compliance (2014).

46 Preamble of the African Children’s Committee’s Revised Guidelines for the Consideration of Communications.

47 African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child art 32.

48 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 44(1).

49 A Llyod ‘The African regional system for the protection of children’s rights’ in J Sloth-Nielsen (ed) Children’s rights in Africa, A legal perspective (2008) 33.

50 Com/002/2009, Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and Open Society Justice Initiative on behalf of children of Nubian descent in Kenya v The Government of Kenya.

51 E Durojaye & EA Foley Making A first impression: An assessment of the decision of the Committee of Experts of the African Children’s Charter in the Nubian Children communication’ (2012) 12 African human Rights Law Journal 565.

52 E Durojaye & EA Foley (n 52 above) 566.

53 IHRDA & OSJI ‘Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa and Open Society Justice Initiative on behalf of Kenyan Nubian Minors v Kenya – Submissions on admissibility’ (2009) para 7.

54 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 3.

55 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 6(3).

56 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 11(3).

57 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 14(2)(b) &(c).

58 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 20(a).

59 African Children’s Committee, Decision on the communication submitted by Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa and the Open Society Justice Initiative (on behalf of children of Nubian descent in Kenya) against the Government of Kenya(2011) para 69 <http://www.acerwc.org/communications/#>(accessed 12 August 2017).

60 S Ko¨hn “Soft law” entrepreneurship and the right of the child to a nationality in an era of migration’ (2012) American Society of International Law 67.

61 African Children’s Charter (n 1 above) art 6(3).

62 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 art 7.

Excerpt out of 61 pages

Details

Title
The role of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child in the follow-up of its decisions on communications
College
University of Pretoria  (Centre for Human Rights)
Course
LLM Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa
Grade
A
Author
Year
2017
Pages
61
Catalog Number
V489790
ISBN (eBook)
9783668959606
ISBN (Book)
9783668959613
Language
English
Tags
Human Rights, Children's Rights, African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
Quote paper
Ulrike Kahbila Mbuton (Author), 2017, The role of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child in the follow-up of its decisions on communications, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/489790

Comments

  • No comments yet.
Read the ebook
Title: The role of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child in the follow-up of its decisions on communications



Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book
- High royalties for the sales
- Completely free - with ISBN
- It only takes five minutes
- Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free