1

Increased Accountability of ASEAN and SAARC to the Realisation of Children’s Right to Protection

Regional Project

NACGs regional training on Child Participation

8th-10th December, 2016

Sri Lanka

2

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2. OBJECTIVES, EXPECTED OUTCOMES, OUTPUTS

3. AGENDA

4. PROCEEDINGS

5. CONCLUSIONS

3

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Given the central role that CSO actors play in advocating for children’s rights, Plan ARO has been cooperating closely with national level child rights based CSO coalitions in order to support joint advocacy efforts, particularly around monitoring and periodic alternative reporting under the UNCRC framework. To this end, Plan ARO organised a number of capacity building trainings as part of a four year regional programme that aimed to strengthen civil society engagement in monitoring children’s rights implementation in Asia. In 2015, the focus of this regional initiative was shifted towards advocacy by regional CSO coalitions towards ASEAN and SAARC for increased accountability to the realisation of children’s right to protection. The Project is implemented with the financial support received from NORAD, SIDA and Ministry of Foreign Affairs Framework Agreement of Finland. The Project transpires at the regional level and is jointly implemented by Plan ARO, Child Right Coalition Asia (CRC Asia) and National Action and Coordination Group against Violence against Children (NACGs), two regional civil society coalitions operating respectively in ASEAN and SAARC sub regions. In order to further increase the effectiveness of their advocacy efforts, CSO partners to the Project, namely CRC Asia and NACGs, have identified the need for developing their existing capacities and skills related to advocacy with a specific focus on countering CSA/CSEC, one of SAIEVAC five priority areas. Group Development Pakistan, on behalf of NACG Pakistan and as the focal point for all NACGs under this project, has been entrusted with the project implementation at SAARC level. Consequently, Group Development Pakistan (GD Pakistan), on behalf of National Action Coordination Group (NACG) Pakistan, organised a regional workshop on child participation from 8th-10th December 2016. The workshop brought together 10 participants from the SAARC countries and ASEAN: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri-Lanka. Those participants were NACGs chairs or co-chairs along with one other technical expert on child participation corresponding to the criteria established by PLAN ARO. Samina Safdar, the co-facilitator was unavailable due to technical problems and as such, Valerie Khan (NACG Pakistan) was the main facilitator for the event. This workshop combines activity 1.2 (Develop an advocacy strategy and action plan) and activity 2.3 (Capacity development activities) of the NACG section of the LFA2 for the intervention titled: “Increased accountability of ASEAN and SAARC to children’s rights to protection”.

4

2. OBJECTIVES, EXPECTED OUTCOMES, OUTPUTS.

Those two activities are part of a synergic effort between NACGs to strengthen the functionality and structure of NACGs for effective regional advocacy relating to child protection (specific objective 2) so that NACGs can enhance their capacity to advocate with SAIEVAC to counteract CSA/CSEC in SAARC (result 2). The program was designed with the following objectives, outcomes, and inputs in mind:

Equip NACGS with skills and information so that child participation is improved at the SAARC level

Strengthen the capacity of NACG members on meaningful, safe, and inclusive participation of children

To promote cross-learning among NACG members as well as between NACGs and representatives of ASEAN on good practices with regard to ethical participation

Foster the process of establishing the SAARC children’s forum. Expected outcomes:

Capacities of NACGs enhanced on child participation

Common will and better capacity to advocate for child participation at SAARC level Expected outputs:

A list of actions prepared in consultation with SRS to contribute to establishing the SAARC children’s forum

A list of actions also prepared by NACG representatives to submit to their respective NACG members to foster child participation within their own networks.

3. AGENDA

Draft Agenda Strengthening Participation at SAARC level

Sri Lanka, 8-10th December 2016

Purpose of the Training: Overall objective: equip NACGs with skills and information so that child participation is improved at SAARC level.

Specific objectives: - To strengthen the capacity of NACG members on meaningful, safe and inclusive participation of children. - To promote cross learning among NACG members as well as between NACGs and representatives of ASEAN on good practices with regard to ethical participation of children.

- Foster the process of establishing the SAARC

Children’s Forum Expected outcomes:

- Capacities of NACGs are enhanced on child participation

5

- Common will and better capacity of NACGs to advocate for child participation at SAARC level

Expected outputs: - a list of action is prepared by NACGs in consultation with SRS to contribute to establishing the SAARC children’s forum

- a list of actions is also prepared by NACGs representatives to submit to their respective NACG members to foster Child Participation within their own network

Approach: Guided, participatory and experiential learning

Names of Facilitators: Training: Samina Safdar, Valerie Khan, Dr Rinchen Chopel

Administration and photos: Sahil Irfan Haider

Report writing: Hamza Hayauddin

Material: Two boards with Chart papers, markers, tape, post-it from various colours, 1 ball, two computers, sound and video system, screen, camera and video camera, tag names, files with TORs, workshop agenda, list of participants, and copy of UNCRC, attendance sheet, sweets and chocolates, microphones, first aid box.

Time Activity Facilitator Notes Facilitator

Day 1: 09:00 Welcoming participants

and ensuring house-keeping: agreeing with working arrangements Security briefing

Plenary exchange Samina and Val

09:30 Facilitate introduction of Participants

Interactive and participatory exchange, building positive group dynamics. Each NACG member presents himself/herself to the neighbor sitting next to him her (clockwise) telling him/her something special/unique about himself/herself. Each NACG then presents his/her neighbor anti clockwise.

Val

10:00 Making Learning Safe, enjoyable and goal oriented (expectations and fears and ground rules).

All participants in groups to give 3 expectations from the workshop. Clarify if any expectation cannot be met. Ask participants to gather around and draw their hands on a chart. Inside the hand they write what they can offer to this workshop, outside the hand they can write their fear.

Samina

6

After completing this, participants can together work on the ground rules. Presentation of objectives and expected outcomes/outputs afterwards

10:30 Refreshment Break

10:45 Clarify participants’ role and distribute tasks during the workshop

All participants will be divided into 3 groups: Energisers (to provide energisers during the

workshop)

Shepherds (to get the participants back after the

breaks Eyes and Ears (to provide feedback to facilitators

about the methodology/facilitations etc) Call for volunteers and if none available attribute roles to designated participants.

Samina

11:00 Share learning from NACGs on meaningful participation of children

Press Briefing: Participants are given half an hour to prepare a statement highlighting key achievements and work on participation of children. Then they rehearse as journalists presenting an event on TV, interviewing participants.

Short video of a press briefing presenting an example of promising practice of child participation organised in collaboration with one NACG

Val

12:30 Lunch

13:30 Understanding child participation

What are your immediate thoughts when you hear the following terms: • Child? • Working children? • Participation? • Children’s participation? • Why should children participate?

What are the reasons for their participation? Throw ball to participants for their replies. Document on the chart, Distribute copies of the CRC, follow this exercise by giving articles of CRC and in groups participants take out the articles related to participation.

Samina

15:15 Refreshment Break

15:30 Exploring meaningful participation of children

Debate: There are benefits for both children and adults when children participate. 45 minutes for group work and 45 min for debate Divide participants into four groups. One set of group talks in favour of the motion while the other against the motion. Various points are noted won on a chart with 2 columns pros and cons

Samina and Val as moderators and timers someone else films the exchange

7

Dr Rinchen Chopel gives his views from SAIEVAC perspective

17:00 Wrap up of the Day with consultation with Ear and Eyes Group

Day 2

09:00 Recap of Day 1 Val

09:30 Understanding various levels of child participation through the Ladder of Participation

Divide participants into groups and give them the levels of participation. Make a ladder and ask each group to a) describe the current levels of participation in their respective NACG and the at SAARC/ASEAN level b) to plan the levels on the ladder that they wish to see in their respective NACG AND at SAARC level, by end of 2019, with yearly progress c) ASEAN and CRC Asia conducts same exercise End session with presentation on Ladder/spiral of participation with the articulation NOW/in future

Samina

10:30 Refreshment Break

10:45 Understanding roles of different actors in promoting participation of children

Understanding role of different actors in meaningful participation of children Group Work and gallery walk

Valerie

12:30 Lunch

13:30 Before we start: Planning for safe and meaningful participation of children

Explore key considerations for planning for child participation in SAARC/ASEAN context Divide participants into 4 following groups: Each group identified key issues and develop actions for address challenges/issues.

1. Ethical issues for child participation 2. Barriers to child participation 3. Best Interest of the child – from a

concept to action (what will we do to ensure best interest of the child is considered as part of planning)

4. Risk Assessment

Val and Dr Rinchen

15:15 Refreshments Break

15:30 Exploring freedom of expressions and access to information as right to participation

Group Work including Dr Rinchen - What are laws, structures, practices

in place? - What works, what does not? - Needed actions?

Samina

16:30 Group Sessions by Eyes and Ears groups to get feedback on the day

Day 3: 09:00 Reflections of the Day 2 Divide participants into 5 groups. Each group

develops 3 questions based on the session in the previous day.

Samina

8

09:30 Key Requirements for sustaining meaningful participation of children

Group work to explore 3 dimensions: resources, graduation to adulthood and creating and sustaining institutional memory To be seen in the context of NACGs and SAIEVAC, ASEAN CRC Asia Gallery walk

Val

10:15 Refreshments

10:30 Understand exclusion and agree on a way forward to tackling exclusion in children participation at SAARC level

Session A: Divide participants in 4 groups: (1) Disability, (2) Girls (3) excluded groups based on their cast, religion, gender, orphans, street children, child labour, etc. (4) economic and social status. Brain storming exercise to identify barriers to participation of above groups in NACGs and in SAARC and post them on a wall. Same exercise for ASEAN and CRC Asia. Group work: What can we do to promote participation of those groups in NACGs and in SAARC And in CRC Asia and ASEAN? Gallery Walk 2 videos

Samina

12:00 Identify challenges and barriers to participation of children in the context of ASEAN and SAARC

Group Work

Samina

12:30 Lunch

13:30 Identify challenges and barriers to participation of children in the context of ASEAN and SAARC

1 video and presentation of work Val

14.30 Intervention of Dr Rinchen to present Child participation in SAIEVAC context and present history and status of SAARC children’s forum ASEAN perspective

Group work, what will be done a) in each NACG to improve child participation b) by NACGs to advocate for improving child participation at SAARC level and for establishing SAARC children’s forum Propositions from ASEAN/CRC for their own area?

Samina and Val

15:30 Refreshment Break

15:45 Exploring practical Tools for participation of children

Group Work: Participants share different tools that they used in their work and present these

16:45 Evaluation and Closing of the workshop.

Evaluation to be filled by participants. Oral feedback as well for the ones who wish to.

Samina and Val

9

All the participants then conduct a closing dance to end the workshop

4 PROCEEDINGS

Day One |

The participants were asked to register themselves via attendance sheets, which ultimately

demonstrated nine countries being represented – the eight SAARC countries and two ASEAN

representatives from the Philippines and Malaysia, both from CRC Asia. As several of the delegates

were new to the group, an icebreaking round of introductions was held wherein each participant

was asked to speak to their neighbour for five minutes, learning the basics about them in addition

to one attribute that was special about them. The participants were then asked to introduce their

neighbour, allowing the group to not only learn their peers’ positive aspects, but begin the session

on a constructive note.

Having acquainted participants with each other, the first order of business was to identify and

post the rules which would govern the workshop. Allowing participants to set their own rules

demonstrated the spirit of collaboration present, and also established a feeling of ownership

among the group, exhibited by the fact that the rules could be distilled into the following: listen,

discuss, be mindful of timing, respect everyone’s views, promote participation, entertain, express

and address emotions, create a protected space, and not pass judgment.

Continuing with the trend of icebreakers, the participants were asked to sit in a circle and draw

an outline of their hands connecting, listing one desirable outcome and one possible danger zone

for the workshop.

The final order of administrative business was distributing logistical roles among the participants,

in this case delegating responsibility for energizers to charge the group between sessions,

shepherds to be mindful of timing during the tea and lunch breaks, and eyes & ears to collect

feedback after the day’s work.

When asked, every participant had stories to tell regarding instances where they were asked

crude, challenging, or even ignorant questions regarding their work on child participation, ranging

from the uninformed to the factually incorrect. In order to compile and collate these responses as

examples of good/bad practices, the participants were asked to roleplay scenarios where one

10

person would portray a child participation champion while the other would pretend to be a

particularly difficult journalist. After being given half an hour to come up with questions, a series

of live “interviews” took place with feedback offered by the roleplayers themselves as well as from

the audience. The findings were categorised as “successes” i.e. what the participants did well, and

“challenges” i.e. the possible problem areas to be aware of going forward.

Successes:

Self confidence

Connection with reality

Able to cite case studies demonstrating the impact of child participation

Showing the intersection of child participation with other issues

Turning the narrative to suggest that child participation can fix future problems, particularly

long-term ones that will show results over a generation

Honesty in regards to current lacunae

Examples of child participation in a country’s constitution

Maintaining eye contact and adopting a non-confrontational nurturing/teaching approach

Engaging with activists and sympathetic journalists

Acknowledging good questions and remaining courteous in the face of bad ones

Positing that child participation is a political right – referring to them as “honourable”

children.

Challenges:

Dealing with follow-up questions, particularly when incessant or interruptive

Need to build the media’s capacity on child participation

Handling particularly mean interviewers i.e. ones who shout and blame

The lack of statistics on the matter

Being able to balance the role of child participation with “bigger” issues and emergencies

across the globe, particularly as they pertained to child participation

Being able to address gender discrimination

Having a set protocol for interviewers and maintaining media exposure in a way that

minimises sensationalism

Being able to demonstrate financial, operational, and ethical accountability.

Examples of the role plays can be watched suing the following links:

https://www.facebook.com/NACG.PAK/posts/1141917905927049

Acknowledging that there is a disconnection between key language, meanings, and the relevant law,

the next session aimed to bridge this gap through a brainstorming exercise. Participants were given

the following words and asked to say the first thing that came to mind: child, working children,

participation, and child participation. After compiling a list of all the associations shouted out, they

were told to come up with the relevant UNCRC articles for each word and its subsequent association.

The final table is presented below:

Word Association UNCRC Articles

Child Art 1,2

Participation Last child first Under-18 Beautiful

42, 2, 4 3 1

11

Root of community development Protection

37, 40

Working Children Art 32

Abuse Exploitation Sorrow Discrimination

32, 34, 35, 36

Participation Fundamental right Process Civil rights Decision-making

3 12, 13, 15

Child Participation 12, 13, 15, 9, 14

At all levels Individual Right Development

24, 27, 28, 29

Participants were then asked to close their eyes and reflect on a personal instance in their past, a child,

where they were deprived of their input in a personal matter or decision. They subsequently shared

that moment with the group and a sense of humility ensues as they realised that every single adult in

the room had experienced an instance where they had been deprived of agency. They were then asked

to remember an incident where their parents/elders had respected their agency and allowed them to

make a personal decision for themselves and again, every participant had an example to share with

the group. It underscored the importance of spreading awareness as it demonstrated that societal

norms clash with child participation throughout the spectrum of socioeconomic standing. One

particular statement from a participant illustrated well how lack of participation can affect children:

“My father was posted away when I was 7, so it was decided that I would stay in a hostel. I did not

want to, but nobody listened to me, nobody asked me. I hated it, I felt so sad, so deprived. I think when

I remember that experience, that is what made me decide to work for child participation".

For the day’s final activity, the participants were divided into two groups and given the task of debating

the following proposition: “There are benefits for both adults and children when children are allowed

to participate”

Overall both groups agreed that it was challenging to prove that child participation could help

providing inputs for policy and legal reform, In general children are perceived as immature, too young

to understand societal challenges. Furthermore, the societal order is afraid of adults losing power and

12

authority over children whom they want to control and subject rather than guide, nurture and

empower. Both participants agreed that case studies and redefining power structures and adults

versus/children’s roles was crucial to promote child participation.

Waheed (NACG Afghanistan) was tasked with collecting the day’s feedback, with the consensus being

that participants were satisfied with the immersive nature of day one, and encouraged by the spirit of

collaboration present. The following points were outlined as points to be aware of while going

forward:

Juvenile justice is a particular problem in SAARC nations as typically, the same procedures

that apply to adults are used on children, and even where separate juvenile systems exist,

they lack children’s input.

The impetus seems to be on NGOs, rather than the government to push for child

participation

There is a lack of awareness on governments’ part regarding how to implement child

participation

o Nepal was cited as a case study here, as civil society and government work together

as NGOs serve as facilitators for the state apparatus

Day Two |

After a recap of the previous day’s findings, the session began with an activity called the ladder of

participation, where participants were asked to rank levels of child participation from worst to best,

and explain their choices. The categories were: manipulation, decoration, tokenism/symbolic

participation, children informed but assigned, children consulted & informed, adult initiated with

decisions shared with children, activities initiated by children and shared with adults, and activities

initiated and directed by children. Most participants categorised them in the presented order, with

some dissenters suggesting that “activities initiated by children and shared with adults” be considered

the top tier, as children and adults need to collaborate in order for child participation to be holistic

and meaningful. Roger Hart’s ladder was then presented for the group and it did indeed place children

and adults sharing decision-making at the top, confirming some of the participants’ suggestions.

13

14

The participants were then asked to consider where their organisation, country/NACG, and

region/SIAEVAC fit on the ladder of child participation. The overwhelming majority ranked their

organisations in the upper spectrum (6-8), country/NACG in the middle (4-5), and SAIEVAC among the

lowest echelon (2-3), suggesting that child participation efforts are more succeeding at the local level

but faltering in the face of state and regional bureaucracy. Reasons cited for this included the delayed

summit, insufficient confidence in SAIEVAC’s ability to deliver on its promises, and a lack of

collaboration and trust with both governments and NGOs. The consensus was that SAIEVAC did well

with NACGs but had trouble bridging the gap between civil society and government. The child board

members were selected exclusively through a government apparatus and as such, are not the most

informed or relevant representatives. Additionally, SAIEVAC looks at child participation through an

adult’s perspective, rather than shifting the lens and engaging children on their level. Additionally, the

participants highlighted a gap between how the government sees children/child participation and how

NGOs experience the ground reality.

Following the lunch break, the NACG members were asked to identify the key stakeholders in

involved in child participation at a regional level and highlight each actor’s functions.

15

The last sessions of the day followed the theme of risk analysis as the focus shifted from intangible

ideals to actual deliverable results and the need to be aware of all the hazards and challenges posed.

To this end, participants were asked to identify the possible problems with ethical issues, barriers, and

best interests of the child, and come up with solutions to these pitfalls. The following tables

summarise their findings:

Ethical Issues Solutions

Ensuring participation for all Continuing sensitisation for all

Protection A code of conduct for everyone involved Capacity building

Conflicting Agendas Ensuring best interests Identifying common ground rather than differences

Accessible, inclusive, and non-discrimination Building systems for nomination across the country, including marginalised groups, in a fair and free manner

Consent/self determination Signing well informed consent forms from parents and children

Religious/cultural interpretations Promoting understanding

Barriers Solutions

Funding Emphasize the importance of child participation to secure budget space Look into better funding uses and CSR commitments Educate funders

Attitude (cultural perceptions + disempowering paradigm)

Capacity building and shaping the narrative Advocacy and lobbying campaigns Education, especially parental education Promoting a paradigm shift

Lack of awareness, information, and impetus Involving children in designing the curriculum Showing that child participation is not a western concept but a human one Involving more stakeholders to increase ownership

Children’s willingness Providing platforms and child friendly engagement Questioning and re-evaluating current models/concepts of child participation.

Lack of facilities and infrastructure Streamline the process to make it less of a logistical nightmare Design more engaging forums, especially for children with disabilities Acknowledge social, cultural, and religious barriers, and account for them

16

Political agendas and ego

Best Interest of the Child Solutions

Lack of understanding Educate and create awareness Draft a code of conduct

Policy/law not in place Fundamental rights

Unheard voices Include child participation

Non-inclusion Inclusion/shared responsibility

Following this, participants were asked to list the risks posed to stakeholders and suggest ways of

alleviating or mitigating those risks in order to allow actors to carry on with their missions. The

following table was drafted in conjunction with all participants:

Conflicts, war, terrorism, political agendas Social security

Safety in travelling Travel insurance, adult companions, adults reaching out to children, permission letters, and alternate travel modes

Risk of abuse outside of statitons Risk assessment, child protection team, and guidelines (CPP/SOPs)

Natural disasters Disaster risk reduction and management skills, training on disaster relief, consideration for time and location of events

Misrepresentation in media Ethical codes for media, orientation for children, preparation of comminques and messages, adult companions

Negative bias of traditional, cultural, and religious structures

Awareness programs/sessions.

Gayathri (NACG Sri Lanka) was asked to collect feedback, and all participants seemed to appreciate

the participatory process and structure. Some suggested more energizers during the sessions as group

energy levels seemed to flag towards the end of the day – unsurprisingly, given the level of

concentration the day’s activities demanded.

17

18

Day Three |

After recapping the previous day’s salient points, participants were given one of their only individual

exercises where they were asked to answer the following questions for their respective countries:

1. What is the legal framework in place for child participation?

2. What is the system in place?

3. What works and what doesn’t work?

The answers were indicative of the culture and attitudes of each country, but there were positives

from each participant:

Bangladesh

1. UNCRC, Children Act 2012, child policies

2. Child parliament, child-led project discussion in metropolitan areas, NGOs network,

cheechau academy, child participation committees at district/uc levels, child development

officers

3. Initiatives are donor-driven, tokenism, lack of execution, child protection committees –

unknown functionality

Afghanistan

1. UNCRC, National strategy for children in crisis, afghan constitution, CPP

2. Participation in educational system, community based child protection committees, child

rights advocacy forum, CP system -> CP advocacy committee

3. Dysfunctional due to law & order situation, lack of funds, adults mindsets. What works =

child protection advocacy network.

Nepal:

1. UNCRC, Article 39 enshrined in constitution, New Children Act, 2010 children policy, school

sector reform program includes child friendly school guidelines at the lower level.

2. CP structures at school and community level, local government – village, district child

centres, district child welfare board, central child welfare board,

Maldives:

1. Family law – children’s views must be considered in custody cases. Child protection act 1991

– reviewed. JJSO,/education bill – reviewed, anti-bullying policy designed with children

2. Some clubs exist but are not sustainable due to turnover.

3. Challenges – limited child produced content in media, limited availability of opportunities –

conflict between school and office timings, , lack of training for teachers,

India:

1. UNCRC, National children policy 2013, national action plan for children, right to education

act – child and sports clubs, several child laws in which child protection is important

2. Child line – child protection through child participation, NACG

3. Child participations have conceptual understanding and support but need a better

connection between NACGs and governments.

19

Sri Lanka:

1. UNCRC, NCPA, Child probate report, children senate, national police, NCPP 2013, and

children’s councils.

2. NGOS maintain data division and distribute but there are no children involved and lack of a

central data structure.

3. Conflict between family values and child participation.

Bhutan:

1. Child protection act – children were consulted, constitution of Bhutan

2. What works – consulting children in law-making, including children in parliamentary

sessions, children’s parliament annually conducting inclusive discussions of laws relevant to

children, mapping assessment by UNICEF.

3. What doesn’t work – more government involvement and regional/rural participation.

Philippines:

1. UNCRC, Children’s Council Law – mandated child participation, CPC in each school by decree

2. Birth registration, children consulted in post-disaster situations, child news – news network

and civil society, political parties

3. What works – birth registration, children consulted in post-disaster situations, child news

networks, civil society, compensation for children, and the inclusion of minority groups in

councils.

4. What doesn’t work – children’s council law exposes children to politicking/dynasties from ay

young age/exposes them to the ugly side of politics.

ASEAN:

1. CRC, ASEAN declaration on EVAW and EVAC, regional plan of action (includes CP), ASEAN

Children’s Forum (implemented in a few years)

2. ASEAN Child Forum – No evaluation left

3. National implementation – no evaluation or evidence yet.

PAKISTAN:

1. UNCRC, SAIEVAC, at some point child parliament

2. What works: NGOs initiatives such as child clubs or Human Rights Children Youth Task Force

3. What does not work: mindset, child parliament, donors driven initiatives, lack of resources,

security challenges, lack of capacity.

20

The representatives from ASEAN (Philippines and Indonesia) were then asked to discuss their model

for child participation and the following question was posed to the group:

In view of ASEAN’s model, should we drop the SAARC children’s forum and focus exclusively on

SAIEVAC?

In response, there were some suggestions to not drop the SAARC children forum, as it is too early to

tell. Others argued that the SAIEVAC process will not do enough yet so there should be a separate

forum wherein the forum should not be a talk show where children get together, speak, and then

nothing is done. A consideration should be made however, for whatever is most economically and

practically feasible. SAIEVAC should still reach out to other SAARC bodies/players, ensuring there is

dialogue between the two. If SAIEVAC is part of SAARC, why can’t it insist on the process occurring at

the SAARC level? Multiple participants suggested that Dr. Rinchen push for SAIEVAC to insist on

SAARC engagement.

The group also identified challenges such as government representatives not knowing how to talk in

a child friendly manner during these dialogues. There is also insufficient knowledge on how these

situations will impact children, as demonstrated by the lack of structured and relevant TOR and

SOPs. Government reps can act in inappropriate ways, and it is difficult to account for the

spontaneity that occurs in such situations.

The consensus seemed to be that we empower SAIEVAC and work through that movement to

establish a SAARC child forum while developing and strengthening our national processes in order to

better contribute at a regional level through joint projects in collaboration with SAIEVAC.

After lunch, the group was joined by Dr. Rinchen Chopal for a Q&A session, with the significant

takeaway points being:

Child participation is a cross-cutting feature in SAIEVAC – level of child participation is a

benchmark of SAIEVAC’s success.

If NACGs have a problem with the government’s selection process, it is up to them to take it

up with the government and try changing the process.

Children should be able to select their representatives, or at least have a say.

2017 will be a turning point as it is where one 5 year plan ends and the next begins.

SAARC summit won’t be happening until 2018, so any large scale initiatives will not be

feasible until then as well.

21

The penultimate session of the workshop split the participants into two groups and asked them to

determine a definition for child participation. Interestingly, the groups came up with similar themes

but different focuses, with one emphasizing the macro perspective, while the other considered a

micro scale:

Group 1: A meaningful process to make a desirable change while maintaining the principles and

insight of the children. It informs and hears from children, allowing them leadership to enhance their

skills and prepare them as active citizens. It engages children in decision-making processes with full

appreciation of their agency under adult support.

Group 2: Parents obligation, role of governments, and participatory mechanisms. All children must be

included but adults must also be aware of children’s needs, rights, and desires. Mechanism must be

endorsed and supported by the state in order to obtain legitimacy.

Some universal themes were that child participation as a right is fundamental, inalienable, and non-

derogable. In addition, it must be inclusive, sustainable, dignified, mainstream, meaningful, and safe.

Carrying on from Day Two’s emphasis on tangible targets and deliverables, the participants were then

asked to list four key bullet point actions that they would commit to at the national and regional levels

to foster child participation and establish a more effective child forum.

India

1. Ensure sharing of report with NACG members and create strategies for CP at state and

regional level.

2. Consultation on how children feel child participation should be institutionalised

3. National level consultation with children and adults.

4. Initiate dialogue through NACGs with government on child participation, using information

from the national level consultations.

With SAIEVAC

1. Better understanding of CP at SAIEVAC level and create space

2. SAIEVAC actually talks to governments in order to make that space, from a top-down

approach.

Bangladesh

1. Start discussion with NACG to prioritise CP among them, and share workshop’s outcomes

with them.

22

2. Work with SAIEVAC to increase NACG members capacity – push the ministry to facilitate the

process

3. Adapt CP as a thematic area within SAIEVAC, rather than as a cross-cutting mission.

4. Pre-mapping of the successes enjoyed by ASEAN and other agencies for SAIEVAC to emulate.

Bhutan

1. Share the workshop results among NACG members

2. Propose a strategic plan document related to NACG and child participation.

3. Creating working groups (core committee) specifically for child participation

4. Consultation workshops with relevant stakeholders i.e. youth, CSOs and the community.

With SAIEVAC

1. Push for partnership between SAIEVAC and SAARC regional fund.

Nepal

1. Capacity building training for civil society actors through NACG-Nepal on CP

2. Children’s consultation on child participation for CP for adding laws.

3. Child friendly booklets/guidebook for civil society actors of children

4. One-day policy-level meeting with government actors, parliamentarians, and policy makers

With

SAIEVAC

1. Exposure to children and CS Actors

2. Regional level workshop orientation of civil society & academic university on CP

3. Advocacy program with SAIEVAC secretariat & SAARC secretariat.

Sri Lanka

1. Pass national child protection policy

2. Child council should help with awareness campaigns for government and children

3. Participation with government officials and activists at the grassroots level.

4. Dialogue between NACG members and government.

Maldives

1. Mainstream CP at policy level for legislative policy-making processes on child related issues

2. Establish media clubs in all schools with democratically elected editorial boards. Training

teachers as well as students with necessary knowledge. , starting with a select initiative

which can then expand to cover more schools – encourage them to prepare child-produced

content (starting online and working to tv/radio)

3. Lobby local government authority to include child rights and child participation as an index

to assess and rank the effectiveness of local councils.

4. Create awareness clips for TV and radio to educate parents on CP

5. Lobby with government to include CP on Child protection act, juvenile justice bill, education

bill, and other future bills which will be relevant for children.

Afghanistan

1. Meeting with NACG members to share what has been discussed at the workshop

2. Establish coordination group with government agents and CSOs particularly focused on CP

a. Have a series of meetings with child involvement where they offer input

23

3. Consult with children on future initiatives such as the international child day and allow them

to be involved in the facilitation.

4. Training for teachers on CP in order to disseminate information at the school level.

SAIEVAC

1. Request technical support at national level and push the government to put CP on the

national agenda

2. Look to emulate ASEAN’s success by strengthening national level implementation of

SAIEVAC provisions on Child Participation

Pakistan

1. Replicate training on child participation at national level

2. Engage with decision and policy makers at national and provincial levels to foster child

participation

3. Improve child participation within NACGs

4. Explore possibilities of further support to promote child participation at regional level

The workshop ended with concluding remarks from ASEAN and a final group session in which

participants were asked to say one word that summarised their experience during the programme.

They came up with the following list:

Child Participation

Understanding different realities

Insightful

Overwhelming

Meaningful participation

Different level of understanding and learning

Active participation

Engagement

Sharing experience.

Collaboration

Hope

24

5. CONCLUSION

The objectives of this workshop and capacity building exercise were achieved as follows:

1. Capacity of 10 NACG members ( 4 women, 6 males) enhanced on child participation

2. Common will and better capacity of NACGs to advocate for child participation at SAARC level

These were accomplished over the course of the workshop as outlined in the report. Additionally,

the following deliverables were achieved:

1. A list of action prepared by NACGs in consultation with SRS to contribute to establishing the

SAARC children’s forum

2. A list of actions prepared by NACGs representative to submit to their respective NACG

members to foster Child Participation within their own networks.

3. The list of actions was accomplished during the stakeholders identification session on Day 2,

while the local government actions were accomplished during the four bullet point

commitments on Day 3. Those will be shared with AIEVAC as well as all NACG members.

It is important to mention that although a specific agenda was designed, the progress of the workshop was adjusted to the needs of the participants so that maximum positive participation and effectiveness of the training components would be ensured. Critical values such as mutual respect and tolerance were present all over the workshop and positive energy was ensured though vibrant energizers that contributed to the group bonding. When other group members than the facilitator were available, they were invited to join and take the lead in the activity. This also provided space for strong and multiple engagement of the group members and reinforced NACGs cohesion.