Regional Conference on the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a Communications Procedure
Conference ReportEast and Southern Africa5 – 6 November 2014, The Nexus Hotel, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Access to Justice for Children in Africa
2 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Content
1. Abbreviations 3
2. Introduction 4
3. Day 1: Introduction to the OP3 CRC, its relevance to Africa, and how it can be ratified 5
3.1 Welcome and opening of the conference 5
3.2 Overview of the OP3 CRC and its role in protecting the rights of children 6
3.3 How does the new international complaints mechanism work and
complement national and regional human rights mechanisms? 7
3.4 Panel Discussion: Sharing experiences – Ratification by Gabon and Germany 8
3.5 Question & Answer Session 10
3.6 Panel Discussion: How can States ratify OP3 CRC and what added value
can it bring for the realisation of children’s rights? 12
3.7 Workshop: Designing a ratification advocacy strategy adapted to the
national context 15
4. Day 2: Best practices and way forward? 16
4.1 Panel Discussion: Establishing synergies and cooperation to achieve
Ratification: National case studies and lessons learnt 16
4.2 Panel Discussion: Using International and Regional Opportunities and
Recommendations 18
4.3 Closing Remarks 20
5. Annex 21
5.1 Useful Links 21
5.2 Programme 22
1. Abbreviations
ACERWC African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
ACPF African Child Policy Forum
ACRWC African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
ACtHPR African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights
AU African Union
CLPC Children’s Legal Protection Center
CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child
CSO Civil Society Organization(s)
DAC Day of the African Child
FGM Female Genitale Mutilation
FSC Federal Supreme Court
HRC Human Rights Council
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IHRDA Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa
UN United Nations
UPR Universal Periodic Review
OPAC Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child
on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict
OPSC Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child
on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography
OP3 CRC Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child
on a Communications Procedure
RADDHO La Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme
RatifyOP3 CRC International Coalition for the Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the Rights of the Child on a Communications Procedure
REC Regional Economic Community
3Access to Justice for Children in Africa
4 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
2. Introduction
1 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure,
A/C.3/66/L.66, 2 November 2011, available in the six UN Languages:
http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=A/RES/66/138&Lang=en
2 The 14 countries are Gabon, Thailand, Germany, Bolivia, Albania, Spain, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia,
Costa Rica, Belgium, Ireland, Monaco and Andorra.
3 These are Benin, Cape Verde, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea Bissau, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritius, Morocco,
Senegal, and Seychelles.
4 The Ratify OP3 CRC – International Coalition for the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the
Child on a Communications Procedure represents international, regional and national non-governmental organi-
sations and networks working on child rights and committed to achieving a universal ratification of the OP3CRC.
The members of the Steering Committee are: Child Rights Coalition Asia (CRC Asia), Child Rights Connect, Child
Rights International Network (CRIN), Eurochild, Kindernothilfe, Plan International, Red Latinoamericana y cari-
beña por la defensa de los derechos de los niños, niñas y adolescentes (Redlamyc), Save the Children, Terre des
Hommes International Federation and World Vision. More information is available at: www.ratifyop3crc.org.
5 The Federal Republic of Germany Foreign Office does not necessarily share the opinions expressed herein.
The sole responsibility for content belongs to author/s.
6 SIDA does not necessarily share the opinions expressed herein. The sole responsibility for content belongs to
author/s.
The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights
of the Child on a Communications Procedure (hereinaf-
ter OP3 CRC 1) was adopted by the UN General Assem-
bly on 19th December 2011 and entered into force on
14 April 2014. So far 14 countries have ratified the OP3
CRC among which there is only one African State, Ga-
bon.2 The OP3 CRC was enacted to enable children
to access justice in the international realm when their
national systems fail to do so. However, they can only do
so if their country ratifies the OP3 CRC thereby accept-
ing the competence of the UN Committee on the Rights
of the Child [hereinafter Committee] to receive commu-
nications/complaints. Apart from the 14 ratifications,
48 countries have signed the OP3 CRC among which
are eleven African States (as of January 2015).3
The International Coalition for the OP3 CRC (hereinaf-
ter Ratify OP3 CRC 4) invited representatives of eleven
countries in Eastern and Southern Africa (Burundi, Ke-
nya, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Sudan, South Afri-
ca, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe) to a Regional
Conference on the Optional Protocol to the Convention
on the Rights of the Child on a Communications Proce-
dure (OP3 CRC) held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from
5-6 November 2014.
The conference was attended by over 70 representa-
tives of Governments (as represented by Permanent
Representations of Member States), National Human
Rights Institutions (NHRI), Civil Society Organisations
(CSOs), International Non-Governmental Organisations
(INGOs), and the academia. It provided them with a
unique opportunity to get an in-depth understanding of
OP3 CRC, why it matters for children‘s rights and how
it complements regional human rights mechanisms in
Africa. Participants were introduced to profound back-
ground information, practical tools and materials to
take OP3 CRC advocacy forward in their countries.
It also provided a platform to share knowledge and
experience.
The conference was kindly supported by the Federal
Republic of Germany Foreign Office 5 with a contribution
from the Swedish Development Cooperation Agency 6,
Plan International, Save the Children International and
Kindernothilfe.
5Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Antje Weber and Flore-Anne Bourgeois-Pieur, the Co-
Chairs of Ratify OP3 CRC, welcomed the participants.
They explained that the main objective of the conferen-
ce was to create an understanding of the OP3 CRC, how
it works, and to explore possibilities for collaboration
for its ratification in order to ensure the realization and
fulfilment of children’s right to access justice worldwide.
The Co-Chairs further provided a brief background
to the Coalition, explaining that it was formed in 2012
after the adoption of the OP3 CRC by the UN General
Assembly and that it comprises more than 80 members
which are national and international non-governmental
3. Day 1: Introduction to the OP3 CRC, its relevance to Africa, and how it can be ratified
organizations. John Graham, the Country Director of
Save the Children in Ethiopia, and Chikezie Anyanwu,
Head of Plan International‘s African Union Liaison & Pan
Africa Program Office, also welcomed the participants
on behalf of their organizations. They congratulated
Gabon for being the first African country to ratify OP3
CRC and stated that the commitment Gabon showed
for the ratification should also extend to the implemen-
tation of the OP3 CRC. They invited all African countries
to join Gabon and ratify the OP3 CRC and stated that
the membership to the coalition is one strategic mecha-
nism for comprehensive engagement for the realization
of children’s rights in Africa.
3.1 Welcome and opening of the conference
6 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
7 Convention on the Rights of the Child, Resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989,
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx
8 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child
Pornography, A/RES/54/263, 25 May 2000, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPSCCRC.aspx
9 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed
Conflict, A/RES/54/263 of 25 May 2000, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPACCRC.aspx
10 Rules of Procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child
on a Communications Procedure, CRC/C/62/3, 16 April 2013, available in the six UN languages:
http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRC/C/62/3&Lang=en
By Kathryn Leslie, Office of the United
Nations Special Representative of the
Secretary-General on Violence against
Children
The OP3 CRC consolidates the international system
of accountability for children’s rights and foresees a
system of individual complaints for the violation of chil-
dren’s rights, inter-state communications, and inquiries
promoted ex-officio by the Committee in the case of
grave and systematic violations of the rights of children.
The OP3 CRC was created as a result of the need for an
international mechanism of appeal when national reme-
dies do not exist or are ineffective to protect children. Its
creation was a result of a long time of discussion within
the UN.
The OP3 CRC has four parts. The first part provides for
general principles that deal with the role of the Commit-
tee and the principles guiding the Committee’s work,
as well as the basic rules of procedure. The second part
which is on communication procedures lays down how
communications should be made and how the Com-
mittee should address them. In the third section, it sets
rules on how the Committee can investigate grave or
systematic violations without necessarily receiving a
complaint. The last part of the Protocol deals with other
key dimensions of the protocol such as international
assistance and cooperation and reporting to the UN
General Assembly.
The OP3 CRC bestows the right to bring communica-
tions to the Committee to children themselves, or their
representatives, who are within the jurisdiction of a
State Party. The complaint can be made on a violation
of children’s rights under the Convention on the Rights
of the Child (CRC 7) and the first two optional protocols
3.2 Overview of the OP3 CRC and its role in protecting the rights of children
– the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights
of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostituti-
on and Child Pornography (OPAC) 8 and the Optional
Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on
the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OPSC) 9
– in cases where the State has ratified the respective
protocol. Once a communication is received by the
Committee it will undergo two stages, to consider its
admissibility and then its merit.
Under the OP3 CRC an inquiry procedure is also pro-
vided if the Committee receives information regarding
grave or systematic violations of rights guaranteed
in the Convention or in the two Optional Protocols.
OP3 CRC uniquely recognizes children’s legal standing
to seek redress for the violation of their rights – either
directly or through a representative and requires States
Parties to establish domestic remedies which will need
to be exhausted before the Committee intervenes.
Furthermore, Rules of Procedure 10 on the OP3 CRC
have been developed by the Committee. They reaffirm
the fundamental principles of the CRC, including on
children’s best interests and respect for the views of the
child. The importance of the OP3 CRC for governments
and children worldwide was highlighted. Governments
will benefit from the inspiration they will draw from OP3
CRC to create good options and solutions for children at
national level, including Ombudspersons for children and
better opportunities for children to access justice when
their rights are violated. The need to reinforce national
child protection mechanisms through the ratification of
OP3 CRC was indicated clearly by Navi Pillay, former UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights: “Children will now
be able to join the ranks of other rights-holders who are
empowered to bring their complaints about human rights
violations before an international body”.
7Access to Justice for Children in Africa
By Dr. Benyam Mezmur, Vice Chairperson of
the United Nations Committee on the Rights
of the Child and Chairperson of the African
Committee of Experts on the Rights and
Welfare of the Child (ACERWC)
The discussion about a CRC communications procedure
dates back to the late 1980’s. The issue was raised again
in 1999 during the 10th anniversary of the CRC. The
fact, that only very few cases were brought to other UN
treaty bodies by children in the past shows that children
need their own communications procedure under the
CRC. The OP3 CRC doesn’t give substantive rights, but
rather, it reinforces the procedural rights already en-
shrined under the Convention and its two OPs. Since the
coming into force of the OP3 CRC, the Committee ruled
on one communication brought by children against their
teachers who embezzled an award the children won in
a certain competition. The communication was ruled
to be inadmissible since it was made by children from
a non-State Party. It was stated that it will take time to
receive solid communications. As regards the second
communication – the first one against a State Party
– no decision has been made yet on the admissibility.
Once the OP3 CRC was adopted, the Committee de-
veloped Rules of Procedure. One of the general princip-
les of the OP3 CRC, the best interests of the child, has
been recently concretized in General Comment No. 14 11.
It will be one key principle to ensure that children are
not manipulated to bring communications before the
Committee. The Rules also clarify the steps that have
to be taken to consider an individual communication
received under the OP3 CRC. For example, the rules pro-
vide a specific time frame for the Committee to make a
decision on a communication as opposed to communi-
cations under other treaties stating in ‘reasonable time’.
The OP3 CRC offers special protection measures for
those bringing communications before the Committee.
Art 6 of the OP3 CRC provides for interim measures
in order to avoid irreparable damage which cannot be
rectified if no measures are undertaken.
Under the OP3 CRC the Committee can receive a
communication from children who do not have the
capacity to bring legal proceedings under national laws.
Where a communication is admissible at face value, the
concerned State Party can express its opinion on the
admissibility of the communication within two months.
If a State submits its opinion within two months it will
have another four months to reflect its view on the me-
rits of the communication. The timeframe is provided as
a result of the conviction that children don’t have time
and one year in a child’s life is 6% of his/her childhood
(“Justice delayed is justice denied”) meaning if a State
fails to submit its opinion the Committee will proceed
without response by the State.
A communication should not be anonymous and must
be written (see Admissibility Criteria in Article 7, OP3
CRC). The Committee has prepared a complaint form
both for adults and children respectively which will be
available on the website of the Committee. The form gi-
ves a detailed guidance on what information is required
by the Committee so that no lawyer is required to submit
a communication. The Communication should not be ill
founded. One important pre-condition for an individual
complaint is the exhaustion of domestic remedies unless
these are ineffective or unduly prolonged. That means
they have to be available and accessible to children un-
der national law. The consideration of the communicati-
on involves an oral hearing. At the end of the hearing, the
Committee may recommend separately or altogether
rehabilitation, reparation, financial compensation, a pro-
posal to prosecute, guarantee of non-repetition, or legis-
lative and administrative measures. If a State Party fails
to implement the recommendations of the Committee,
the Committee will require the State to make a written
explanation for its failure to comply with the instructions.
In the worst scenario of non-compliance, the Committee
will make a public statement against the State Party and
may report it to the General Assembly.
With regard to the relationship between regional mecha-
nisms and the communications procedure under OP3
CRC, the Committee is not an appellate mechanism
from regional bodies. And a communication pending
before regional bodies will not be considered by the
Committee. With regard to the national level it was sta-
ted that OP3 CRC serves primarily to strengthen access
to justice at national level.
3.3 How does the new international complaints mechanism work and complement national and regional human rights mechanisms?
11 General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (art. 3, para. 1), CRC/C/GC/14, 29 May 2013,
http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRC%2fC%2fGC%2f14_&Lang=en
8 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Ratification of OP3 CRC by Germany
By Joachim Schmidt, Ambassador of
the Federal Republic of Germany to Ethiopia
The Government of Germany shares the goal of the
universal ratification of OP3 CRC with the organizers of
the Regional Conference. Germany negotiated actively
at the UN for the adoption of the OP3 CRC and was the
first European country to ratify it. The active initiation
and negotiation was due to the history of Germany 100
years ago in the First World War (WWI) which took the
life of millions of children during its course and in the
aftermath. In face of this, there was a realization that at
least the children need to be protected; that they have
rights, even if they did belong to the enemy. This was
soon codified in International Law and the Conventi-
on and its Protocols now spell out clear expectations
of how children should be treated. Their best interest
should be a primary consideration when it comes to all
areas of their lives.
Thus, there is a close historical connection between the
German history and the development of a framework for
children’s rights. As history has taught we expect these
standards to be upheld regardless of whether there
is war, conflict, poverty or social inequality. The Third
Optional Protocol will go long ways in making this vision
a reality.
Two areas have been especially important for the Ger-
man ratification process of the OP3 CRC: Civil society
and effective implementation of the Convention. The
ratification process of OP3 CRC by Germany was highly
backed by the involvement of CSOs. The relentless
activism and continued dialogue of the CSOs with the
government for such kind of complaint mechanism
made the engagement and ratification of Germany a
possibility.
Several concerns were raised during the initial discussi-
on on a complaints mechanism for the CRC, but during
the course of time the Government ultimately came to
the conclusion that these concerns were either allevia-
ted by the Committee itself or that they were outweig-
hed by the positive aspects of such a Protocol. OP3 CRC
can contribute much to improve the implementation of
the Convention in the following four ways:
1) The Convention has now been brought into line with
the other major human rights conventions.
2) The Committee on the Rights of the Child is compo-
sed of experts who are particularly sensible to the
needs of the child when it seeks remedies. So it is a
unique platform for children to appropriately voice
their concerns.
3) Due to the individual complaints, the recommenda-
tions and general comments issued by the Commit-
tee would now be shaped by a greater awareness
of some of the specific problems facing children all
over the world.
4) The Protocol will lead to better national jurispruden-
ce and better domestic mechanisms to deal with
rights violations.
Ratification of OP3 CRC by Gabon
By Marie Delicat, Embassy of Gabon
to Ethiopia
Gabon was the first African country to ratify OP3 CRC.
This step was taken in line with the ratification of the
African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child,
which took place on 18th May 2007, which also provides
for a communications procedure. The Government of
Gabon is committed to protect human rights, and in
particular, children‘s rights, and this is entrenched in the
Constitution. Children are protected from all forms of
abuse and trafficking. The government has undertaken
measures for law reform including on provisions in the
Civil Code and the Penal Code. There is also a manual of
procedure which specifies the roles and responsibilities
of all actors who deal with child victims. The govern-
ment gives due consideration to the best interests of
3.4 Panel Discussion: Sharing experiences – Ratification
by Gabon and Germany
9Access to Justice for Children in Africa
the child and the ratification of the ACRWC and the OP3
was done to reinforce its commitment to the protection
of child rights.
Child Justice Project in Ethiopia
By Selamawit Girmay, Child Justice Project
Office, Federal Surpreme Court of Ethiopia
More than 53% of the Ethiopian population are
children. Many stakeholders are involved in the pro-
tection of children’s rights and the Federal Supreme
Court (FSC) is the main stakeholder. The Child Justice
Project Office was established in 1999. It has four
basic strategies:
1. Conducting research which can influence revision of
laws;
2. Infrastructural development such as establishing
child-friendly structures in different courts;
3. Capacity building and awareness raising through
training of those who work with children such as
prosecutors, judges, lawyers and non-governmental
organisations;
4. Creating a referral network.
The office has undertaken the following activities:
a. Expanding child friendly structures for child victims,
children in conflict with the law and those who pass
through the justice system in civil cases of marria-
ge, maintenance, succession and so forth. Under
this activity, the office has been able to bring major
changes by introducing child-friendly settings, infor-
mal court proceedings, using professional assistan-
ce, child-friendly language use, and by establishing
child waiting rooms.
The Office realised that there is lack of human re-
sources particularly social workers. Hence the Office
arranged a two years vocational training for them
with the Ministry of Education.
b. Establishment of Children’s Legal Protection Center
(CLPC)
The CLPC has five main activities: it provides free
legal aid service to all children who pass through
the justice system including legal representation;
mediation services; DNA testing to assert paternity;
psychosocial services which includes provision of
shelter, food, education, counselling, medical care
and so forth; and capacity building of different sta-
keholders.
c. Referral system
Due to the lack of coordination among those who
work on the rights of children, a Memorandum of
Understanding and Operational Agreement was
signed between 34 governmental and non-govern-
mental organisations to create synergy and better
protect children’s rights through a referral system.
Through this system matters can be referred to
relevant institutions including the CLPC.
The progress made includes the establishment of 52
children’s courts in the federal and regional states, the
signing of guidelines for child friendly administration of
justice by all presidents of regional and federal courts
to ensure uniformity, and the creation of a national legal
aid network. These developments go hand in hand with
what the OP3 CRC would like to achieve for justice for
children in Africa.
10 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Moderation: Theophane Nikyema, Executive
Director, African Child Policy Forum (ACPF)
Questions to and answers from the speakers
of the morning session
Following the presentations, many questions were
raised. They related to the role of CSOs in the process
of ratification of OP3 CRC in Germany and Gabon, the
mechanisms put in place to monitor the implementation
of the Convention and the Optional Protocols, how to en-
sure that children are empowered and not manipulated
to submit communications to the Committee, what the
OP3 CRC can do for children subjected to violence in the
family setting and how access to justice can be ensured
in some Muslim communities where it is assumed that
marriage is in the best interest of the child, and Female
Genitale Mutilation (FGM) is not criminalized. Questions
also related to how States can be convinced that OP3
CRC is an added value and complementary to existing
regional and national mechanisms and what measures
can be taken when States fail to follow the recommenda-
tions of the Committee and when they fail to accept the
competence of the CRC Committee. Another question
related to how Germany promotes the ratification of OP3
CRC in its bilateral and multilateral dialogue with other
countries including through its development aid.
In addressing the questions raised, the panellists raised
important points. On the participation of CSOs it was
highlighted that they can participate by supporting
children in submitting communications, engaging in the
inquiry procedure, and promoting and lobbying for rati-
fication. In assisting children to access the Committee,
three documents were/ will be produced which are the
child friendly version of the OP3 CRC, complaint form
for adults and child friendly complaint form for children.
The Committee takes due consideration of the age and
maturity of the child.
In assuring the utility of the OP3 CRC in advancing ac-
cess to justice, Dr. Benyam Mezmur explained that if the
OP3 CRC had a subtitle, it would have been ‘from urban
to rural, from law to practice, from pilot to scale’. The
Committee tries to ensure that justice should not only
be for those who can afford it.
Therefore, in the lobbying process it should be menti-
oned that OP3 CRC is an incentive to provide an effecti-
ve national child justice system and also an opportunity
to learn from other States since the decisions of the
Committee on one case is not only for the utility of the
concerned State Party, but also for other countries
consideration.
Moreover, the principle of exhaustion of local remedies
will be guided by the best interest of the child and be
more clarified during the course of work of the Commit-
tee. The local remedy that should be sought should not
3.5 Question & Answer Session
11Access to Justice for Children in Africa
be prolonged or ineffective. What amounts to prolonged
or ineffective remedy is subject to the interpretation of
the Committee, but the prospect of success is a guiding
notion. In addition, the local remedy that should be
sough is a binding one, not other remedies. Hence, the
Committee will decide on a case by case basis to iden-
tify if the principle is fulfilled or exemption applies. In
doing so the Committee will respect the sovereignty of
the State but it won’t let sovereignty override the rights
protected under the Convention.
„The principal objective of the OP3 CRC is to
encourage States to ensure that children have
access to justice at national level, and not neces-
sarily to facilitate for the Committee to receive
many communications.“
Benyam Mezmur
The Committee could recommend financial compensa-
tion, repatriation, prosecution and support to the victim.
When a State is not complying with the recommenda-
tions of the Committee, the State will appoint a rappor-
teur to engage with the Committee during reporting,
and/or make public statements, and it may also report
the situation to the UN General Assembly with the
seriousness it deserves. The Committee will also adopt
a Child Protection Policy to ensure that the Committee
adheres to the highest standards of child protection
throughout the process.
In relation to countries which do not criminalize FGM
and child marriage, there is no exception provided under
article 21 of the ACRWC. Both the CRC and the African
Committee believe that penalising child marriage and
FGM should be done through immediate measures,
not progressive ones since legislation should guide the
behaviour of the society.
All States Parties to the ACRWC, with the exception of
Egypt, have accepted the competence of the African
Committee to deal with complaints. However, a comp-
laint against a country not a State Party to the Charter
will not be registered. The same will apply to the OP3
CRC. Different to the African procedure, the OP3 CRC is
optional and has an ‘opt out’ option. It does not stand by
its own, rather complements already existing treaties.
It is a procedural document and States are at liberty to
ratify it since it is optional.
The reason why only one African country ratified the
OP3 CRC is perhaps due to lack of awareness. Hence
CSOs should actively push governments to ratify the
OP3 CRC by raising awareness.
In response to the question raised about the role of
CSOs in Gabon, Mme Delicat made clear that CSOs are
influencing State ratification of the Protocol in Gabon;
however, they did not influence the ratification of OP3
CRC. It is the government that took the initiative becau-
se it had political will to do so.
With regard to promoting the OP3 CRC, Thomas Rohland,
representative of the Government of Germany, highligh-
ted that the Government promotes and pushes for the
ratification of OP3 with bilateral agreements and dialo-
gues with States. These activities should be undertaken
also by the other 13 countries that have ratified OP3 CRC.
12 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Moderation: Violet Odala (Save the Children)
The process of ratification of treaties including the OP3
CRC varies from State to State according to each coun-
try’s constitutional law. Many have to get a decision of
the Parliament to do so.
National perspective: strategic litigati-on through the‘160 Girls Campaign“
By Merci Chidi, Ripples International (Kenya)
Ripples International conducts strategic litigation to
ensure rights of girls, and assists survivors of sexual
violence. Rape of girls or defilement, which is a legal
term for sexual violence against a girl child, is common
in many African countries and perpetrators are often fa-
mily members and police officers. Despite the penalties
for defilement, the law is not adequately enforced. For
this reason, Ripples International initiated legal procee-
dings to ensure the protection of the rights of girls. At
the time the campaign “160 Girls” was launched in 2011,
Ripples International had 160 girls victims between the
ages of 13 and 18 who needed justice. Currently the
number has grown to more than 400.
In May 2013, the court ruled in favour of the girls. It
established that the police failure to enforce existing
defilement laws and to protect them from defilement
are violations of domestic, regional and international
human rights law. The ruling of the court is significant
as the case with the 160 girls set a precedent. Eleven
petitioners got access to justice, obliged Kenyan police
to conduct investigation and empowered human rights
by making the State accountable for violations. Ripples
International now engages in monitoring the police
service and holding the police accountable across the
country and in ensuring compliance of court orders. In
case implementation of the court orders cannot be en-
sured, Ripples International will take the next step and
go back to court. After this, domestic remedies can be
considered as being exhausted and the question arises:
What to do next and would the OP3 CRC procedure be
an option?
Regional perspective: Communications submitted to the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC)
By Ayalew Getachew, Secretariat of ACERWC
The ACERWC receives communications in accordance
with article 44 of the ACRWC. The Committee has so
far received 4 communications against the government
of Uganda, Kenya, Senegal and one State Party which
cannot be mentioned because the ACERWC has not
considered the admissibility of this Communication.
The communication against the government of Uganda
was received in 2005 and it was submitted by the Cent-
re for Human Rights, University of Pretoria, on behalf of
children in Northern Uganda, where it was claimed that
grave breaches of children’s rights took place between
2001 and 2005. The alleged breaches were; recruitment
and use of children as soldiers, sexual violence against
children, killing and maiming of children, abduction
of children, and attacks on schools and hospitals. The
ACERWC undertook an investigation mission with the
consent of the State Party, whereupon it was found that
the State Party had violated Article 22 (which deals with
involvement of children in armed conflict), and as a fun-
damental duty - Article 1(1) of the ACRWC, and not the
rest of the issues as alleged in the Communication.
The second Communication was submitted against the
government of Kenya in 2009 by IHRDA and the Open
Society Initiative on behalf of children of Nubian de-
scendants in Kenya. It was alleged that the government
of Kenya treated Nubian descendants as “aliens” as it
believed that they did not have any ancestral homeland
within Kenya and that children of Nubian descendants
were denied the right to birth registration and nationality
as provided under article 6 of the ACRWC among other
articles. No investigative mission was conducted as the
government did not respond to the allegation. The ACER-
WC found multiple violations of Articles 6(2), (3) and
(4); Article 3; Article 14(2) (b), (c) and (g); and Article
11(3) of the Charter by the Government of Kenya.
The third Communication was submitted to the ACER-
WC on July 2012 by the Centre for Human Rights of the
3.6 Panel Discussion: How can States ratify OP3 CRC and what added value can it bring for the realisation of children’s rights?
13Access to Justice for Children in Africa
University of Pretoria and La Rencontre Africaine pour la
Défense des Droits de l’Homme (RADDHO) on behalf of
the talibes in Senegal. It states that more than 100,000
children (known as talibes) aged between 4 and 12 years
are sent away by their parents to live in Qur’anic schools
known as daaras. The Communication points out that
these children are forced by their instructors (known as
marabouts) to work on the streets as beggars, are kept
in an unsafe and unhygienic structures, are not provi-
ded with clean water, and enough food, and that they
are injured by speeding motor vehicles in the course
of begging on the streets. In sum, the Communication
concludes that the government did not regulate these
schools and hence violated articles 4, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16
and 29 of the ACRWC. The ACERWC is now preparing
its written decision to be shared with the Complainants
and the Respondent State. A follow up mission was un-
dertaken after the decision was made. The government
states that the situation has changed while the situation
on ground tells otherwise.
Generally, the ACRWC communication procedure can
advance the protection of children’s rights mainly
because it makes a violation public and by highlighting
weaknesses in the translation of the ACRWC into dome-
stic realities. It also assists the government in addres-
sing the situation through technical recommendations
by the ACERWC .
The most recent developments in the work of the ACER-
WC include the application for standing before the
African Court of Humans and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR)
to get binding decisions and the revision of the Guide-
lines on Communications to harmonize them with the
procedure of the African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights and the Court.
14 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Another regional perspective: Com-munications submitted to the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR)
By Gaye Sowe, Institute for Human Rights
and Development in Africa (IHRDA)
The ACHPR was established in 1987 with the mandate
to receive communications. It can now receive commu-
nications from all countries except Morocco and South
Sudan. However, South Sudan has recently ratified the
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The
Commission has a promotional and protective mandate.
It can receive both individual and interstate communica-
tions. While more than 300 individual complaints have
been submitted, there has only been 1 interstate com-
munication (DRC vs. Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda). The 10
countries against which the most communications have
been submitted include Nigeria (32), Zimbabwe (15),
DRC (14), Cameroon (13), Ethiopia (11), Sudan (11), Ken-
ya (11), the Gambia (10), Botswana (8) and Tanzania (7).
While economic and social rights are not justiciable in
many civil law countries, the African Charter on Human
and Peoples’ Rights has made these rights justiciable; it
has also provided for group rights such as the right to live
in a clean environment. Furthermore, it has no derogati-
on clause.
Cases on the rights to family life are considered by the
Commission; nonetheless it does not specifically deal
with children’s rights – it deals with general human
rights issues.
The experience of the Commission in respect of its com-
munications procedures is useful to inspire other me-
chanisms. It gives very progressive recommendations.
Some of the recommendations are ground breaking, for
instance in a case involving Cameroon compensation
was paid. The recommendations can be good advocacy
tools. The Commission also provide access to persons
who do not get any help at the local level as they could
be exempted from exhausting local remedies. Another
added value is that violation caused by non-state actors
could be alleged before the Commission. At the same
time, the Commission faces some challenges. These
include delays in decision-making, physical access to
the Commission, the non-binding nature of the recom-
mendations, lack of awareness about the Commission’s
role, and non-compliance with Commission recommen-
dations. Nevertheless, it was underscored that advan-
tages outweigh the drawbacks. CSOs play a vital role in
putting pressure on governments to ratify the African
Charter as well as other human rights treaties and sub-
mitting cases to the regional human rights mechanisms.
Questions and answers:
After the three presentations were made, participants
raised some questions pertaining to how local remedies
can be exhausted in a situation where there is conflict,
and on what could be done against Boko Haram in
Nigeria. In response, it was explained that the require-
ment of exhaustion of local remedies has exceptions
and complainants can be exempted in the event of wide
spread conflict, where national courts cannot be relied
on. On the issue of Boko Haram, it was explained that
joint sessions between all stakeholders involved could
perhaps lead to a solution.
15Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Key elements to take into account for a successful ratification campaign stra-tegy
By Laure Elmaleh, Child Rights Connect
Designing an advocacy strategy is essential to use
resources effectively, maximise opportunities for
advocacy and connect advocacy activities with other
areas of work and general goal of your organisation. This
presentation provides an overview of different elements
and aspects which could be included in an advocacy
strategy for the ratification of OP3 CRC, according to
the national context:
Identify key targets: Who are the decision-makers?
Who are the allies? Who are the right messengers?
Who is the audience?
Identify the right messages: assess the national po-
litical context, adapt key arguments to the national
context.
Identify key opportunities to convey the messages to
the targets.
Set goals, develop action plan and evaluate results.
Recognise capacities and gaps.
Generally actors with formal authority to make the
decision to ratify (e.g. government representatives,
parliamentarians depending on the ratification process
in your country) should be targeted as well as actors
with the capacity to influence those with formal autho-
rity (e.g. NHRI, ombudsperson, high-level individuals,
UNICEF). Supporters and allies are needed throughout
the whole process to make the voice louder and resour-
ces and effectiveness stronger.
Key standard messages why a State should ratify OP3
CRC could be:
To reaffirm its recognition of children as rights-hol-
ders;
To reinforce its national remedies;
To strengthen its commitment to the rights of child-
ren with minimal implementation obligations;
To demonstrate international leadership in child
rights.
These messages should always be adapted to the natio-
nal context and target.
It is important to identify entry points, events, symbolic
dates, processes that can be used to call for ratification
of OP3 CRC. All these entry points depend on the natio-
nal context, political system and current activities in the
country and should be chosen carefully.
Suggested activities to push for the ratification of OP3
CRC could be:
Write a joint letter to relevant ministries, parliamen-
tarians, to the permanent mission to the UN of the
State (or follow up the letter sent by the Internatio-
nal Coalition);
Organise a meeting with relevant ministries;
Organise a meeting with influential members of
parliament;
Organise a seminar on OP3 CRC with relevant pro-
fessionals (NGOs, NHRI, UNICEF, Bar Association);
Get media attention on OP3 CRC (write a press
release, use twitter, facebook, write an oped,…).
The Participants were then divided into eleven country
groups to discuss elements of advocacy strategies for
their respective countries after which they presented
the outcome of their discussions. The country groups
continued their work on the second conference day and
presented their country strategies at the end which will
now be implemented at country level. Minutes from the
discussions can be shared with CSO participants on
demand.
3.7 Workshop: Designing a ratification advocacy strategy adapted to the national context
16 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Moderation: Gaye Sowe, Institute for Human
Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA)
Ratification of OP3 CRC in Germany from a CSO perspective
By Antje Weber, Kindernothilfe
The idea to create an individual complaints mechanism
for the CRC was discussed in 1999 on the 10th anniver-
sary of the Convention. Several NGOs took this idea back
home. In Germany, Kindernothilfe took the lead on OP3
CRC advocacy work in Germany. One of the first steps
was to conduct a study on opportunities and limitations
of a complaints mechanism for the CRC. In 2001, NGOs
launched a campaign to lobby for the ratification of
OP3 CRC. In the following years, many discussions and
workshops with relevant stakeholders at governmental
level followed. Children’s rights are a cross-cutting issue
in Germany and thus, many ministries and governmental
agencies at communal, federal and national level were
involved. At the beginning, the position of the govern-
ment towards OP3 CRC was sceptical due to a number
of open questions such as: What does a complaints me-
chanism mean for the national level? Does the CRC in-
corporate States duties only or create justiciable rights?
Should we wait for the adoption of an Optional Protocol
to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights or the ratification/ entry into force of the
two Optional Protocols of the CRC? Would a communi-
cations procedure overlap with other mechanisms?
The National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) in Ger-
many – the German Institute for Human Rights – functi-
oned as a mediator throughout the years and invited all
stakeholders to a workshop in 2009, which was a turning
point in the argumentation of the German Government.
Striving for the creation and adoption of OP3 CRC beca-
me the goal of joint action by government and civil socie-
ty in Germany which marked its peak with the German
ratification in 2013. The support of the German Govern-
ment for OP3 CRC continues since then through the
support of lobby and advocacy for OP3 CRC in Geneva
and New York and most recently through support to CSO
initiatives such as this Regional Conference in Ethiopia.
Some lessons learnt from this process might be useful
for CSO in other countries, including the following:
Joint action between governments & civil society is
needed;
NHRI or other institutions/ organisations can functi-
on as a mediator;
Champions/ key persons at Ministries/ Parliament
are needed to bring the issue into Parliament;
Lobby activities should target the national and inter-
national level;
Questions & objections should be taken seriously;
Legal/ political arguments based on profound rese-
arch are most convincing;
Patience and perseverance is needed;
Research and evidence is useful to support the ad-
vocacy work.
OP3 CRC Advocacy Activities in Rwanda
By Rene Christian Umukunzi, Child Rights
Coalition Rwanda
The Child Rights Coalition in Rwanda aims to monitor
and report on the implementation of the CRC and the
ACRWC, including advocacy on the ratification of OP3.
To meet this objective, the coalition carried out a mee-
ting with stakeholders and developed a five years action
plan. The priority areas under the action plan are the
dissemination of concluding observations of the CRC
Committee (which included a recommendation on rati-
fication of OP3 CRC) and the ACERWC in child friendly
versions, carrying out ad-hoc lobbying which includes
dialogue with the government and parliamentarian via
SMS Major challenges faced by the coalition throughout
4. Day 2: Best practices and way forward?
4.1 Panel Discussion: Establishing synergies and cooperation to achieve Ratification: National case studies and lessons learnt
17Access to Justice for Children in Africa
the process are identified to be lack of understanding of
the OP3 and its content by the government and other
CSOs, limitation of NHRIs, and reshuffling of govern-
ment officers. The Child Rights Coalition Rwanda will
continue to push for OP3 CRC in the future. It will get
inspiration from CSO’s experience in other countries, for
example from Germany.
Thailand and Slovenia: Cooperation with National Human Rights Institutions and UNICEF
By Laure Elmaleh, Child Rights Connect
The objective of the presentation was to give concrete
examples of cases of cooperation between CSOs and
other actors like UNICEF and National Human Rights
Institutions (NHRIs) to advance the ratification process
at national level.
The government of Thailand supported OP3 CRC from
the very beginning but the role of key actors was crucial
in pushing the government for ratification. CSOs orga-
nized a briefing for different ministries, the NHRI and
other national CSOs. Further meetings were then orga-
nised between CSOs and the NHRI and with the country
and regional UNICEF offices to encourage support the
ratification. This led to the ratification of the OP3 in
2012 making Thailand one of the first two countries to
ratify the OP3 besides Gabon.
Slovenia is expected to ratify OP3 CRC by the end of
2014 or at the beginning of 2015. This is attributable
to the partnership between UNICEF and CSOs in the
dialogue with several ministries involved in the ratifica-
tion of OP3 CRC. This cooperation included the orga-
nisation of a roundtable to raise awareness about OP3
CRC to professionals working with and for children such
as Ombudsman officers, attorneys, the criminal police,
the Ministry of Justice, CSOs and other bodies, which
resulted in the support from several ministries to the
ratification of OP3 CRC.
These examples show that involving and getting the
support of different actors at national level, in parti-
cular UNICEF or the NHRI could prove useful within a
broader advocacy strategy to engage with the State
on the ratification of OP3 CRC. These advocacy strate-
gies should be adapted specifically to each country’s
context. UNICEF and NHRIs can be legitimate actors
to engage a discussion with the State on OP3 CRC and
could provide support to CSOs, while CSOs can provide
their expertise on the topic.
Questions and answers:
Following the presentations the floor was open for
discussion. The questions raised were on what the key
advocacy messages were in Rwanda, how children were
involved in the ratification process in Germany and what
are the roles put for children in the implementation of
the OP3. Additional questions on leverage of Informati-
on and Communication Technology (ICT) and the media
to promote ratification and the link between NHRI and
the Ombudsman were raised.
In response to the questions raised directly to the Child
Rights Coalition Rwanda, Chris Umukunzi explained that
the advocacy message is a simple one that calls the go-
vernment to make Rwanda one of the top countries for
children’s rights and that the ratification of OP3 CRC is
not adding any additional obligation on the government
but reinforcing ongoing efforts. ICT were also very useful
for the advocacy work. Besides the support from Plan
International Sweden and members of the coalition,
he said that the coalition in Rwanda is undertaking its
advocacy with a zero budget approach.
In addressing questions made to Antje Weber from
Kindernothilfe, she replied that children were not involved
in the ratification process because of technical issues.
However, a case study was made to show what impact
the adoption and ratification of the OP3 CRC have for
children’s rights in Germany. In January 2014 a group of
children met the Committee to present their views on
the realization of children’s rights in Germany. A child-fri-
endly brochure on OP3 CRC shall be produced with the
participation of children in the future. The media has
been engaged in all the process through press releases
and press conferences. But OP3 CRC is not an easy topic
and needs further explanation. Therefore, it is difficult to
attract media attention throughout the country. Concer-
ning the implementation of OP3 CRC, the Government
recently announced the creation of an independent
monitoring body at the NHRI in 2015.
Laure Elmaleh from Child Rights Connect indicated that
CSOs from Thailand did involve children in their work on
OP3 CRC. Child Rights Connect also produced a child
friendly questionnaire 12 to collect the views of children
on OP3 and access to justice. More than 300 children
around the world filled the questionnaire and Child
Connect is engaging with the Committee to accommo-
date the views of the children in its working document.
12 To access the survey report presented to the UN Human Rights Office
and the presentation made the Human Rights Council’s Annual Day on
the Rights of the Child 2014 based on the finding of the survey, please go to
http://www.childrightsconnect.org/access-to-justice-for-children/
18 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
The Use of International Advocacy Opportunities and Recommendations
By Laure Elmaleh, Child Rights Connect
Several international procedures qualify for advocacy
activities for the ratification of OP3 CRC and should be
used in national advocacy strategies.
The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism
of the Human Rights Council (HRC) aiming at impro-
ving the human rights situation of each of the 193
United Nations (UN) Member States. Under the UPR,
the human rights situation of all UN Member States is
reviewed every 4.5 years. At the end of each review, the
HRC publishes an outcome report listing the recom-
mendations made by other States that the State
under review will have to implement before the next
review. This mechanism could be useful for OP3 CRC
advocacy; as some states that have already ratified the
OP3 CRC may make recommendations to other states
to ratify it. Ghana, for instance, was recommended to
ratify the OP3 CRC by Slovakia in 2012 and accepted
the recommendation; a year later Ghana signed the
OP3. CSOs can use these UPR recommendations in
their advocacy by reminding their State on the recom-
mendations from the UPR and work with the recom-
mending states to follow up on the implementation of
the recommendation.
A second advocacy opportunity at international level is
the CRC Reporting. The Committee regularly reviews
each State party to the CRC, the OPSC and the OPAC.
Through this procedure, the Committee examines the
progress each State has made in implementing the
Convention and its Optional Protocols. CSO have the
opportunity to submit shadow reports on the implemen-
tation of the CRC in their country to provide additional
information for the Committee and will be heard at the
pre-session in Geneva before the Committee invites the
State to the session and presents its Concluding Obser-
vations. CSOs can incorporate the issue of ratification
of the OP3 in the alternative report they submit to the
Committee and can follow up on the implementation
of the Concluding Observations, as the Committee
now systematically includes a recommendation on the
ratification of OP3 CRC in the Concluding Observations
of each country that it reviews.
4.2 Panel Discussion: Using International and Regional Opportunities and Recommendations
Moreover, States that are running for election of the
HRC can make voluntary pledges on actions that they
would take during their term as a HRC member. Some
voluntary pledges include a commitment by the State
to become party to all core human rights instruments.
If it is the case, this commitment can also be used for
advocacy by reminding the State and to follow up on the
ratification measures the State undertook.
Furthermore, symbolic dates such as the 28th of
February, 14 April, 20th November, 19th of December
which are the anniversary of opening to signature of
OP3, entry into force of OP3, anniversary of the adop-
tion of CRC, and adoption by the General Assembly of
OP3 respectively can be used to specifically advocate
on the ratification of the OP3, as they would provide
international visibility to States that would ratify on
those dates. As an example of using a combination of
these international opportunities, the International
Coalition wrote letters to Permanent Missions of all
UN States in July 2013 to advocate for the ratification
of OP3 CRC, suggesting to States to ratify OP3 CRC
during the next UN Treaty Event taking place each
September in New York, and reminding them, where
relevant, of the international commitments that they
had taken within the UPR.
The Use of Regional Advocacy Opportunities and Recommendations
By Dr. Aquinaldo Mandlate, Community Law
Centre, University of the Western Cape
The AU bodies with human rights mandate or with
human rights related mandates can play a key role in
promoting ratification of the OP3, especially those with
children’s rights monitoring mandate. The ACHPR and
the ACERWC envisage collaboration of their respecti-
ve monitoring mechanisms with CSO’s which creates
many opportunities where CSO’s can directly engage
with the mandate of regional human rights institutions
to encourage State parties to ratify OP3.
One example is to engage with these treaty bodies such
as the ACHPR or the ACERWC carrying out promotio-
nal visits to State Parties and request them to include
ratification of OP3 in their recommendations to State
19Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Parties, raise the issue at the CSO and NGO Forum influ-
encing the sessions through recommendations and/or
including recommendations on ratification of OP3 CRC
in alternative reports to the ACERWC and the ACHPR.
The fact that the ACHPR and the ACERWC provide for
cooperation with international human rights Institutions
opens another important avenue to advocate for ratifi-
cation of the OP3 by engaging the ACHPR/ the ACERWC
and the CRC Committee to strengthen collaboration
on that matter. The second more indirect way can be
carried out through dissemination of information via
radio or websites and following up of implementations
made by regional human rights treaty bodies. Working
with Special Rapporteurs with a mandate relating to
children such as for example the Special Rapporteur
of the ACERWC on Ending Child Marriage, the Regional
Economic Communities (RECs), and the African Peer
Review Mechanism to promote access to justice and/or
give recommendations to ratify OP3 CRC are additi-
onal opportunities that can be used by CSOs. Lastly,
the crucial role of regional and sub-regional coalitions
such as the Network of African National Human Rights
Institutions, Child Rights Networks, and CSOs Forum in
pushing the agenda at the national and continental level
was highlighted.
Questions and answers
The presentations were followed by a discussion. Ques-
tions were raised on what assistance for CSO can be
obtained from the African Union, how child rights policy
made by RECs can be used in the ratification of the OP3
CRC, how can CSOs that don’t have an office in Geneva
take part in the UPR, the possible threats of the ad-
vocacy campaign, and how to navigate and create good
understanding of OP3 CRC at regional level.
In responding to the questions raised, it was mentioned
that CSOs which don’t have offices in Geneva can still
engage in the UPR in collaboration with other CSOs
that have an office in Geneva and engage with embas-
sies at capital level. In addition, the CSOs who have not
participated in the UPR can use the recommendations
emanating from the UPR for their advocacy work. In
addressing the issue of threats and creating understan-
ding, it was said that understanding the situation on
the ground and the context of each country is crucial.
Further it was said that one of the main objectives of
OP3 CRC was ensuring access to justice at the national
level and any advocacy on the ratification of OP3 CRC is
advocacy to strengthen the national system.
The participants suggested using the 25th anniversary
of the CRC and the Day of the African Child (DAC) as
opportunities for advocacy, to form or join Ratify OP3
CRC. A suggestion was made to propose access to
justice as the theme for the DAC 2016. Further, it was
mentioned that the RECs are also an important avenue
for advocacy on ratification of the OP3 by their Partner
States, as more and more, the RECs are adopting a child
rights agenda, such that discussions have begun in the
East African Community to develop a Regional Protocol
for Children.
20 Access to Justice for Children in Africa
By Annalies Borrel, African Child Policy
Forum (ACPF)
The conference has created a great opportunity for key
stakeholders to exchange experience and knowledge
on OP3 CRC as well as opportunities, challenges and
the advocacy strategies in the ratification of OP3 CRC.
The ACPF leaves four important messages for partici-
pants;
1. There is an elevated awareness on child rights in
Africa, in the AU and within CSOs, as evidenced by
the African report prepared by ACPF;
2. The OP3 CRC creates opportunities to reinforce the
implementation of the ACRWC which also draws
inspiration from other international documents;
3. We should be cautious that the necessary child
protection systems ensure that children are not
vulnerable in the process; and
4. We all have a role to play in making OP3 CRC a norm
and standard through advocating its ratification.
4.3 Closing Remarks
Collaborative actions are needed to safeguard child
rights; and such action should not only be advocacy for
ratification, but also support of implementation. The
ACPF expressed its commitment to support this pro-
cess. She then thanked the organizers and participants.
By Antje Weber, Kindernothilfe, and Flore-Anne
Bourgeois-Prieur, Plan International, on behalf
of Ratify OP3 CRC
The International Coalition Ratify OP3 CRC thanks all
participants, speakers, supporters and organisers of
this Conference.
The Conference is seen as a kick-off for future ad-
vocacy activities targeting the ratification of OP3 CRC
in East and Southern Africa. Ratify OP3 CRC offers
constant support for all activities of the country delega-
tions and invites all participants to join the Coalition as
members. 13
13 Membership Application Forms are available under
http://ratifyop3crc.org/about-us/joinus
21Access to Justice for Children in Africa
5. Annex
5.1 Useful Links
African Child Policy Forum:
www.africanchildforum.org/site
African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child:
http://acerwc.org
Child Rights Connect:
www.childrightsconnect.org
Ratify OP3 CRC:
http://ratifyop3crc.org
United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child:
www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRC/Pages/CRCIndex.aspx
UN Special Representative on Violence against Children:
http://srsg.violenceagainstchildren.org
5.2 Programme
5 November 2014
Introduction to the OP3 CRC, its relevance to Africa, and how it can be ratified
Morning: Introductory sessions for Civil Society and Government Representatives
9:00 Welcome and Opening of the Conference
Antje Weber and Flore-Anne Bourgeois-Prieur (Co-Chairs of Ratify OP3 CRC), John Graham (Country
Director Save the Children Ethiopia), Chikezie Anyanwu (Country Director Plan International Ethiopia)
9:30 Overview of OP3 CRC and its role in Protecting the Rights of Children
Kathryn Leslie (Office of the United Nations Special
Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children)
10:00 Coffee Break
10:30 How does the new international complaints mechanism work and complement national/regional
human rights mechanisms?
Dr. Benyam Mezmur (Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and Chairperson
of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child)
11:15 Sharing Experiences: Ratification by Gabon and Germany
Gabon: Marie Delicat (Embassy of Gabon to Ethiopia)
Germany: Joachim Schmidt (Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany to Ethiopia)
Ethiopia: Selamawit Girmay (Federal Surpreme Court)
12:00 Question & Answer Session (with all presenters)
Moderation: Theophane Nikyema (African Child Policy Forum)
12:30 Joint Lunch for Government and Civil Society Representatives
Afternoon: Practical sessions for Civil Society Representatives
14:00 Panel discussion: How can States ratify OP3 CRC and what added value can it bring for the
realization of children’s rights?
Moderation: Violet Odala (Save the Children)
Mercy Chidi (Ripples International, Kenya)
Ayalew Getachew (Secretariat of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of
the Child)
Gaye Sowe (Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa, IHRDA)
Panel discussion and Question & Answer
15:30 Coffee Break
16:00 Workshop: Designing a ratification advocacy strategy adapted to the national context (Part 1)
Moderation: Flore-Anne Bourgeois-Prieur (Plan International), Laure Elmaleh (Child Rights Connect)
17:45 End
20:00 Cultural Evening
Ethiopian Restaurant “Totot”
Access to Justice for Children in Africa22
6 November 2014
Best Practices and way forward?
Participants: Civil Society Representatives
9:00 Welcome and Opening
Recap of Day 1: Key arguments for the ratification of OP3 CRC/Key steps for an effective
ratification campaign strategy
Chikezie Anyanwu (Plan International)
9:45 Panel discussion: Establishing synergies and cooperation to achieve ratification: national case
studies and lessons learnt
Moderation: Gaye Sowe (Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa, IHRDA)
The German example: Cooperation between Civil Society and Government,
Antje Weber (Kindernothilfe)
Thailand and Slovenia: Cooperation with National Human Rights Institutions and UNICEF,
Laure Elmaleh (Child Rights Connect)
The case of OP3CRC Advocacy in Rwanda, Rene Christian Umukunzi (Child Rights Coalition,
Rwanda)
Panel discussion and Question & Answer
10:45 Coffee Break
11:15 Panel discussion: Using international and regional opportunities and recommendations
Moderation: Gilbert O. Onyango (The East Africa Centre for Human Rights, EACHRights)
Use of international advocacy opportunities and recommendations,
Laure Elmaleh (Child Rights Connect)
Use of regional advocacy opportunities and recommendations,
Dr. Aquinaldo Mandlate (Children’s Rights Project, Community Law Centre, University of
the Western Cape)
Panel discussion and Question & Answer
12:30 Lunch
14:00 Workshop: Designing a ratification advocacy strategy adapted to the national context (Part 2)
Moderation: Petronella Mayeya (Save the Children), Laure Elmaleh (Child Rights Connect)
16:00 Closing Remarks
Annalies Borrel (African Child Policy Forum)
Antje Weber (Kindernothilfe/ RatifyOP3 CRC)
Flore-Anne Bourgeois-Prieur (Plan International/ RatifyOP3 CRC)
16:30 End
23Access to Justice for Children in Africa
Publisher:KindernothilfeDüsseldorfer Landstraße 18047249 DuisburgGermany
Telephone +49 (0) 203 77 89 0Info-Service: +49 (0) 203 77 89 111Fax: +49 (0) 203 77 89 118
[email protected]://en.kindernothilfe.org
Editors: Antje Weber (Kindernothilfe; responsible according to the German Press Law), Laure Abado (Plan International), Violet Odala (Save the Children)
Final Editing: January 2015
Design: Eckard Kleßmann
Conference Rapporteur: Abigeya Getachew, Adiam Zemenfes Tsighe
With consultative status at the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
Photo credits: Front Page: Christian Herrmanny, Conference Photos: Photo Unique Ethiopia, Back Side: Jakob Studnar
Donation Seal of QualityKindernothilfe handles donations in a trust-worthy manner. Every year since 1992 this has been officially confirmed by the Seal of Quality for charitable organisations awarded by the German Central Institute for Social issues (DZI). This certifies its financial responsibility and statutory use of donations.
In the context of the transparency prize 2012 Kindernothilfe was awarded for the excellency of its reporting.