COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Forty-third session 
Pre-sessional open-ended Working Group
on the Question of a Convention on the 
Rights of the Child
2[6]–30 January 1987 

Written statement submitted by [Pâddi Ranen], a non-governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council on behalf of itself and four national organziations of Sweden 

STATEMENT ON THE DRAFT CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD, PROTECTION IN ARMED CONFLICTS (ARTICLE 20) 

Children are badly abused in armed conflicts.  Warfare of today tends to be more indiscriminate than conflicts in earlier times.  The overwhelming majority of victims nowadays are civilians, among them a large number of defenceless minors. 

The absolute prohibition in the Geneva Convention of any attack against civilians is not respected.  In fact, it happens that civilians, including children, are targeted by military forces with the [ ] of terrorizing the population. 

However, children are not only victimized as all of the civilian population. All too often in too many countries, children are enlisted to the armed forces.  This problem is dealt with by the two Additional Protocols (1977) to the Geneva Conventions: persons below the age of 15 shall not be recruited to the armed forces.  The Protocol also says that among those above that age, older minors should be enlisted first. 

Not even that regulation is respected by all governments and parties to conflicts today. 

Young boys have recently been sent to clear up the minefields with their own bodies. This is nothing but [ ] murder, a flagrant violation of humanitarian principles. 

Within the United Nations a work is in progress for the formulation of an International Convention for the Rights of the Child. One important [ ] of this project is, of course, the protection of children in times of war. 

Unfortunately, the formulations agreed so far do not provide further protection for the minors, on the contrary they represent steps backwards. 

There is no recognition in that text of the absolute ban against targeting civilians, there is no indication that the drafting age ought to be higher than 15. 

The discussion on the draft United Nations Convention should therefore be reopened on these aspects. The only decent position is that NO CHILD be drafted for military combat service. Those who, because of their age, are not otherwise recognized as fully responsible citizens should not be sent to the battlefields and be exposed to the risk of being killed. 

We therefore urge the participants in the United Nations Human Rights Commission working [ ] on the draft Convention on the Rights of the Child to reopen the discussion on the protection of children in times of war and ascertain a better protection. 

ANNEX 

ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 20 IN THE DRAFT UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD 

Article 20 as adopted on 11 March 1986 on the forty-second session of the Commission on Human Rights. 

1. The States parties to the present Convention undertake to respect and to ensure respect for rules of international humanitarian law applicable to then in armed conflicts which are relevant to the child. 

2. States parties to the present Convention shall take all feasible measures to ensure that no child takes a direct part in hostilities and they shall refrain in particular from recruiting any child who has not attained the age of 15 years into their armed forces. 

3. In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States parties to this Convention shall take all feasible measures to [ensure] protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict. 

Paragraph 1 

This sentence refers to the international humanitarian law which is relevant.  Though the expression "ensure respect" could have been more specific, this paragraph as a whole is not objectionable. 

Paragraph 2

This text is no improvement as compared to the [ ] in the Additional Protocols (19777) to the Geneva Conventions.  This in itself is disappointing as, during the decade since protocols were agreed, the real situation in this area has deteriorated seriously.  In recent years a large number of children have been pushed into taking part in warfare itself, even in combative roles.  Stricter rules in this field are required. 

The formulation "all feasible measures" is weak and [ ] that, for instance, so-called voluntary participation by children is not totally prohibited.  Better would be: "[ ] measures". [sic] The intention of the word "direct could be inferred to mean that indirect participation, such as transport of weapons and [ammunition] would be allowed for minors. 

However, the specification of the age below 15 [ ] an indirect recognition that minors of 15, 16 and 17 years of age can be enlisted. This is a serious shortcoming, not least against the background of the [ ] of boys of 15 and 16 in some countries.  Therefore, the most relevant aspect is not covered.  On the contrary, the text [raises] a direct acceptance of recruitment of such young people. 

The Red Cross Protocols at least address the problem.  They state in an addition (Protocol I, article 77, paragraph 2), "In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of 15 years but have not attained the age of 18 years, the parties to the conflict shall endeavour to give priority to those who are oldest." The idea was that among the persons between 15 and 18 efforts shall be made to avoid recruiting the youngest.  This was of [ ] a compromise formulation.  During the so-called Diplomatic Conference when this was discussed there were those who argued that the age should be 18 [ ] full [ ]. This is the decent position. 

The draft article 20 therefore represents a weakening of the humanitarian law which in turn also is unsatisfactory. 

A possible solution would be to omit any reference to a specific age.  In fact no other article refers to an age in that manner. The implication of simply stating that no child should be recruited would in reality be an age limit of 18 for many countries but there are also countries with a more narrow (younger) definition of "child". Article 1 of the Draft Convention says, "According to the present Convention a child in every human [ ] to the age of 18 years unless, under the law of his State, [ ] attained his age of majority earlier." This drawback, however, [ ] less serious than the [ ] reflected in the present draft. 

 It has been argued that there is a distinction between the two bits of paragraph 2, in article 20.  In relation to the [ ] there is a reference to "child", in relation to recruitment to the armed [ ] the age limit is introduced. This could be interpreted to mean that [ ] a 15 year old could be enlisted to the army he could not be allowed to take part in [ ]/ This is logical, but the problem in that this is a [ ] fine [ ] to be understood — or at least work — in practice.  In situations of war all soldiers will be used. 

Paragraph 3

This paragraph is weaker than international humanitarian law.  It does not reflect the absolute prohibition against attacks on civilians including children.  Attacks can only be made on military objectives.  This is in fact one of the most fundamental principles of the Geneva Conventions.  The formulation in article 20 makes this [aspect] relative, its use of "all feasible measures" in this context is most unfortunate.  

Conclusion 

The shortcomings in this text are serious. As the subject area is of such a fundamental importance, it is necessary to [reopen] the [discussions] on this very point before the draft is given its final form. 

It is proposed that the revised article be given the following [ ]: 

1. The States parties to the present Convention undertake to respect and to [ ] respect for rules of international humanitarian law applicable to them in armed conflicts which are relevant to the child. 

2. States parties to the present Convention shall take all necessary measures to ensure that no child takes [ ] in [ ]  and they shall refrain from recruiting any child into their armed forces. 

3. In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States parties to this Convention shall take all necessary measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict. 

[P.S.] It should be noted that the XXVth International Conference of the Red Cross in October 1986 adopted a resolution the implementation of which [ ] a reopening of the discussion about article 20.  The conferences stressed that the protection accorded by the new Convention should be at least the same as the one provided by the existing international humanitarian law standards.