8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
1/98
International Study ofBest Practices in MonitoringChildren's Rights
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
2/98
Head Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman's) Secretariat
& Children's Complaint Office
Benevolent Fund Building, Near Zero Point,
Islamabad - Pakistan
Tel: 92-51-9252391-5, Fax: 92-51-9252178
WMS Homepage: http://www.mohtasib.gov.pk
CCO Homepage: http://www.mohtasib.gov.pk/cco
CCO Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/CCO.Pakistan
General Queries: [email protected]
File a Complaint: [email protected]
Regional Offices
Lahore
15-A, 3rd Floor, State Life Building,
Davis Road, Lahore
Tel: 92-42-99201017-20
Fax: 92-42-99201021
E-mail: [email protected]
Karachi
4-B, Federal Government Secretariat,
Saddar, Karachi
Tel: 92-21-99202106-7
Fax: 92-21-99202121E-mail: [email protected]
Peshawar
1st Floor, Benevolent Fund Building,
Peshawar Cantt.
Tel: 92-91-9211570
Fax: 92-91-9211571
E-mail: [email protected]
Quetta
Barganza Villas, Qaddafi Street,
Link Zarghoon Road, Quetta.
Tele: 92-81-9202679
Fax: 92-81- 9202818E-mail: [email protected]
Sukkur
Bungalow No.CS-550/13-B, Behind UBL,
Shalimar, Near Distt. Jail, Sukkur
Tel: 92-71-9310007
Fax: 92-71-9310012
E-mail: [email protected]
Multan
Bungalow No. 17(XIX) Stadium Corner,
Vehari Road, Multan.
Tel: 92-61-6783473
Fax: 92-61-6783475E-mail: [email protected]
Faisalabad
24/Z/13-A, Behind Chenab Market,
Susan Road, Madina Town Faisalabad
Tel: 92-41-9220546
Fax: 92-41-9220545
E-mail: [email protected]
DERA ISMAIL KHAN
House # 31/4, Quaid-e-Azam Road,
D.I. Khan
Tel: 92-0966-9280095
Fax: 92-0966-9280096E-mail: [email protected]
Report writen by Ms. Natasha Simonsen
The statements in this publication are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
policies or the views of UNICEF
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
3/98
International Study of
Best Practices in Monitoring
Children's Rights
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
4/98
Children should never be an appendix. They should be the
starting point. Without Childrens Rights there are noHuman Rights.
Trond Waage,Former Ombudsperson
for Children, Norway
Norway was the first country in the world to establish an Ombudsperson for Children in 1981.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
5/98
i
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Table of Contents
Executive Summary...................................................................................................... v
1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................1
2. Objectives .............................................................................................................3
3. Methodology .........................................................................................................4
4. Limitations ............................................................................................................8
5. Situational Analysis ............................................................................................. 10
a) Government bodies ................................................................................................................ 10
b) Ombudsmans Offices ............................................................................................................. 12
c) Civil Society Organizations ...................................................................................................... 17
6. International Best Practice in Child Rights Monitoring ........................................ 20
a) United Kingdom ...................................................................................................................... 20
b) Republic of Ireland .................................................................................................................. 24
c) Australia .................................................................................................................................. 27
d) New Zealand ........................................................................................................................... 31
e) Canada .................................................................................................................................... 33
f) Norway .................................................................................................................................... 37
g) India ........................................................................................................................................ 41
h) Malaysia .................................................................................................................................. 45
i) Croatia ..................................................................................................................................... 48
7. Global and Regional Networks ............................................................................ 50
a) Global Networks ..................................................................................................................... 50
(i) The International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs ........................................................ 50
(ii) The Global Network of Independent Human Rights Institutions for Children ................... 50
b) Regional Networks .................................................................................................................. 51
(i) The Asia Pacific Forum of NHRIs ......................................................................................... 51
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
6/98
ii
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
(ii) The European Network of Ombudspersons for Children (ENOC) ...................................... 52
(iii) The Ibero-American Network of Ombudsmen for Children ............................................... 53
8. Applicability of International Best Practice to Pakistan ....................................... 54
a) Separate or Integrated? .......................................................................................................... 54
b) Distribution of Roles and Responsibilities between Federal and
Provincial Governments .......................................................................................................... 57
c) Economic and Political Instability ........................................................................................... 58
9. Recommendations for Reform ............................................................................ 60
a) Mandate and Functions .......................................................................................................... 60
b) Independence ......................................................................................................................... 64
c) Accountability ......................................................................................................................... 70
d) Accessibility ............................................................................................................................. 72
e) Coordination mechanisms ...................................................................................................... 73
f) Relationship with Civil Society ................................................................................................ 74
g) International Cooperation ...................................................................................................... 75
9. Summary of Recommendations .......................................................................... 76
Annex A: The Paris Principles ..................................................................................... 81
Annex B: Useful Resources ......................................................................................... 86
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
7/98
iii
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Acronyms
ANNI Asian NGOs Network on National Human Rights Institutions
APF Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions
CCO Childrens Complaint Office
CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child
EHRC Equality and Human Rights Commission (UK)
ENOC European Network of Ombudspersons for Children
HRCP Human Rights Commission of Pakistan
ICC International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights
Institutions
KP Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa
LHRLA Lawyers for Human Rights and Legal Aid
NADRA National Database and Registration Authority
NCCWD National Commission for Child Welfare and Development
NHRI National Human Rights Institution
NGO Non-government organization
PCCWD Provincial Commission for Child Welfare and Development
SPARC Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child
SUHAKAM Malaysian Human Rights Commission
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
8/98
iv
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Foreword
Children comprise more than 50 per cent of Pakistan's population. Yet, besides an overburdened
formal justice sector, there are no dedicated forums for receiving and resolving complaints of
children or for public accountability of institutions charged with responsibility for protecting
childrens rights. It was with this in mind that the Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat collaborated with
UNICEF to establish the Childrens Complaint Office. There was a need to establish an institutional
arrangement for providing children with a voice in matters relating to them.
Since its initiation the CCO has undertaken many activities to raise the profile of child rights among
the public sector, civil society, media and the general public. The CCO has conducted workshops
and conferences to raise awareness about child rights and the CCO. In addition to a communication
campaign the CCO staff has visited federal schools, particularly in rural areas, to raise awarenessabout the CCO and child rights among children. Child Rights Clubs are being established in various
federal schools through the CCOs facilitation and a Childrens Advisory Panel will be established to
ensure childrens participation in the CCOs decisions and activities. A Child Rights Steering
Committee comprising senior officials from the concerned federal agencies and civil society has
also been established to monitor progress on the National Plan of Action for children and Pakistans
compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
While the CCO has made significant accomplishments, there is always room for improvement. It
must be noted that the CCO is the first of its kind in South Asia. This presents a barrier with respect
to the adoption of a Child Ombudsman model that is relevant and feasible in Pakistan. There is notmuch literature available on child ombudsman models. Hence there was a need to commission the
study on International Best Practices of Child Rights Monitoring.
This report examines the current situation of child rights in Pakistan, explores international
experience and best practices of child rights monitoring and proposes recommendations to
improve procedures and systems for handling childrens complaints and monitoring child rights.
Strengthening the countrys child protection mechanism is a process that involves several
stakeholders. This report highlights feasible recommendations to strengthen the mechanism. We
have taken the initiative but hope it will be followed by much needed efforts from the federal
government and civil society.
Ejaz Ahmad Qureshi
Advisor/Head Childrens Complaint Office
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
9/98
v
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Executive Summary
Pakistans obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child require it to establish an
effective, independent institution to monitor childrens rights and enforce accountability for rights
violations. Child rights institutions worldwide take many different forms, but the Committee on the
Rights of the Child and the UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre have both concluded that, regardless
of the particular model adopted, the most important thing is that institutions have the capacity to
monitor, promote and effectively protect childrens rights. The experience of different countries in
varied stages of the development cycle reveals a number of recurring tensions. The issues which
arise include: the question of whether child rights institutions should be separate from, or
integrated within, general human rights bodies; the appropriate distribution of responsibilities
between different levels of government and the related tension between individual access to
justice (complaint handling) and broader advocacy roles; and the problems posed for human rights
institutions in fragile states as a result of political and financial instability.
Consideration of the experience in other countries, compared with an analysis of the prevailing
situation in Pakistan, yields a number of specific recommendations for the future of the child
ombuds system in Pakistan. These recommendations for reform are divided into seven thematic
areas. They are: a) mandate and functions; b) independence; c) accountability; d) accessibility; e)
coordination; f) relationship with civil society; and g) international cooperation.
With respect to a) the mandate and functions of the office, it is noted that the jurisdiction of the
Childrens Complaint Office should be as broad as possible, which may require re-evaluation of
some of the existing limitations on that jurisdiction. The functions of the office include complaint
handling, conducting systemic inquiries, and research and reporting. It is important that each of
these functions are highly developed and carried out by specifically trained officers.
The independence of the office (recommendation b) could be buttressed by further clarity in the
establishing legislation; amendments to the appointment and dismissal process; guarantees of
pluralism; and financial independence.
Accountability(point c) includes both accountability to Parliament and to children, and necessitates
forward planning, child participation, and regular reviews of progress made towards identified
objectives.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
10/98
vi
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Accessibility(recommendation d) refers to the geographic and physical accessibility of the office to
children, and to those who might be likely to complain on their behalf. A number of specific
recommendations are made for improving accessibility, including through both physical andtechnological channels, subject to considerations of privacy and anonymity for children.
Coordination (point e) requires both formal and informal mechanisms for referral of complaints,
standardisation of procedures (and adequate training in those procedures), as well as sharing best
practices between and within institutions at both federal and provincial levels. One important
avenue for coordination is through annual meeting of representatives from all of the Childrens
Complaint Offices, perhaps in a venue rotating between the different provinces and the capital.
The relationship with civil society(recommendation f) is a crucial one since civil society groups andorganisations are likely to be a key source of information and complaints about the rights of
children. The Child Rights Steering Committee established by the Federal Childrens Complaint
Office is to be welcomed in this regard. The existing regulations governing the making of
complaints may need to be amended to clarify that civil society organisations have the capacity to
complain on behalf of children.
Lastly, international cooperation will be a key source of information and support, including through
global and regional networks, in which Pakistan may have the opportunity to play a leading role.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
11/98
1
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
1. IntroductionPakistan is a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and is obliged to respect
and protect the rights of children, who constitute almost 50% of its population. Successful
implementation of Pakistans Convention obligations requires the establishment of independent,
effective and credible human rights institutions, including institutions with a mandate specifically
for children. Such institutions are particularly important for realising the human rights of children
because of their additional vulnerability to abuse, and their limited ability to seek remedies for
violations of their rights.
National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) have a number of functions. These include: helping to
ensure that laws and regulations comply with human rights obligations; monitoring rights
violations; providing a means of resolving disputes and complaints outside the formal justice
system; and supporting the work of civil society groups in defending human rights. The important
role played by NHRIs in promoting and protecting human rights has been acknowledged by the
General Assembly of the UN1, the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna
2, the Human
Rights Council3, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
4and the Secretary-General
5,
and the Committee on the Rights of the Child6.
Regardless of whether national human rights institutions are general in nature, or whether they
have specific mandates for children (or any other vulnerable group), such bodies should comply
1 Principles relating to the status of national institutions (Paris Principles), GA Res 48/134, annex of
20 December 1993. The Paris Principles are reproduced in Annex A to this report.
2 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action A/CONF.157/NI/6 of 17 June 1993.3 National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: Report of the Secretary
General to the Human Rights Council A/HRC/13/44 of 15 January 2010.4 HR Res 2005/74 of 20 April 2005.5 Institution-building of the United Nations Human Rights Council, HRC Res 5/1 of 18 June 2007.6 General Comment No. 2 The role of independent national human rights institutions in the promotion
and protection of the rights of the child, CRC/GC/2002/2, adopted 15 November 2002, and GeneralComment No. 5 General measures of implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (arts.
4, 42 and 44, para. 6), CRC/GC/2003/5 adopted 27 November 2003.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
12/98
2
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
with the Paris Principles adopted by the General Assembly in 19937. The Paris Principles have been
agreed by the international community as embodying the minimum requirements which NHRIs
must satisfy in order to be both credible and effective. Their importance as a guideline for
childrens rights institutions was acknowledged by the Committee on the Rights of the Child in its
General Comment No. 2 (2002).
Dedicated childrens rights institutions may take many forms. They may be structured around a
single person (such as the Childrens Ombudsperson in Ireland, or Child Advocates in Canada). They
may be multi-member bodies (such as the National and state-based Commissions for the
Protection of Children in India). They may have complaint-handling functions, or play an exclusive
policy role, or they may follow a hybrid model incorporating both functions. Sometimes there is a
specific Childrens Commissioner within a broadly mandated institution such as a Human Rights
Commission. The different forms which NHRIs take will be explored in detail below. However, it is
important to note that, according to the Committee on the Rights of the Child:
[Our] principal concern is that the institution, whatever its form, should be able,
independently and effectively, to monitor, promote and protect childrens rights. It is
essential that promotion and protection of childrens rights is mainstreamed and
that all human rights institutions existing in a country work closely together to this
end8.
In its most recent Concluding Observations for Pakistan dated October 2009, the Committee
regretted that Pakistan has not yet set up offices of an ombudsperson for children at federal and
provincial levels, and further, it urged Pakistan to:
7 Paris Principles, ibid.8 General Comment No. 2, ibid., para 7.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
13/98
3
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Establish an independent and effective monitoring mechanism in accordance with
the Principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and
protection of human rights (the Paris Principles) and taking into account the
Committees general comment No.2 (2002) on the role of independent human rights
institutions, ensuring that it is provided with adequate human and financial
resources and easily accessible to children. It should have a mandate to monitor the
implementation of the Convention as well as to receive and address complaints from
children, and do so in a child-sensitive and expeditious manner9.
This study has been commissioned as part of a project to try to fill the gap due to the lack of an
independent national institution for childrens rights in Pakistan. Working with the Federal and
Provincial Ombudsmen Offices across Pakistan, and with the support of UNICEF, the objective is to
strengthen monitoring and accountability for violations of childrens rights. This includes, but is not
limited to, handling individual complaints. The overarching goal is to create an institution that can
address systemic issues affecting children and function as an advocate for child rights in Pakistan.
2. ObjectivesThe objectives of the study are threefold:
I. To conduct a survey of international best practices on national institutions for childrensrights;
II. To assess the applicability of the different models to Pakistan; andIII. To develop recommendations for the Ombuds system in Pakistan to improve monitoring
of child rights, and promote accountability for rights violations.
9 Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of reports submitted by States parties underarticle 44 of the Convention, Concluding Observations: Pakistan CRC/C/PAK/CO/3-4 of 15 October
2009, pp4-5.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
14/98
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
15/98
5
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
with sources from both developed and developing countries. The primary sources were the
websites of the relevant institutions, their annual reports, their reports to the Committee on the
Rights of the Child, and the Concluding Observations of that Committee.
c) ConsultationConsultation with international institutions and networks interviews and discussions with
members of national human rights institutions and supporting research institutions and networks,
including:
Asia Pacific Forum on Human Rights; European Network on Ombudspersons for Children; UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence; United Kingdom Equality and Human Rights Commission; Australian Human Rights Centre; and Faculties of Law and Social Policy at the University of Oxford.
d) Development of recommendationsThe applicability of international practices to Pakistan was assessed with reference to the situation
analysis and in consultation with stakeholders in Pakistan, including:
Childrens Complaint Office of the Federal Ombudsman; Site visits and staff interviews at the Childrens Complaint Offices in Punjab and Sindh;
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
16/98
6
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Interviews with the Provincial Ombudsman for Punjab and the Secretary to theProvincial Ombudsman for Sindh;
UNICEF Pakistan; Human Rights Commission of Pakistan; Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (SPARC); and Childrens Complaint Office Stakeholder Workshop at the Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat
in Islamabad on 26 August 2010.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
17/98
7
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
List of Participants at the Childrens Complaint Office Stakeholder Workshop, Wafaqi Mohtasib
Secretariat, Islamabad, 26 August 2010
Name Designation Ministry / Organisation
Mr. Ejaz Ahmed Qureshi Advisor / HCCO CCO
Mr. Ikram Ullah Jan Director General Ministry of Religious Affairs
Major Rd. Muhammad Safdar DGM (IOD) NADRA
Mr. Arif Majeed Joint Educational Advisor Ministry of Education
Mr. Tariq Khurshid Malik Deputy MD Pakistan Bait-ul-Maal
Mr. Hussain Asghar Deputy Head NCB-Interpol FIA
Mr. Nisar Ahmad Deputy ChiefPlanning and Development
Division
Mr. Khalid Lateef Deputy Director NCCWD
Mr. Sajjad Bukhari Inspector Police
Mr. Mulazim H. Mujahid Deputy Educational Advisor Ministry of Education
Mr. Qindeel Shujaat Executive Director Cynosure Consultants
Ms. Umm-e-Zia Managing Director Cynosure Consultants
Mr. Muhammad Raza Ali Senior Research Assistant Cynosure Consultants
Ms. Natasha Simonsen Child Protection Consultant
Mr. Arshad Mehmood Executive Director SPARC
Ms. Saiqa Ashraf Senior Programme Office Rozan
Ms. Nausheen Yaseen Khan Project Assistant Pakistan Coalition for Education
Ms. Sidra Zulfiqar Programme Officer Pakistan Coalition for Education
Ms. Pashmina AliProgramme Manager Child
ProtectionSave the Children UK
Mrs. Alia Asad Section Officer (Admin) Ministry of Human Rights
Mr. Mohammad Jamal Khan
SaddozaiProject Coordinator CCO
Ms. Amna Khalid Training & Research Officer CCO
Mr. Fazal Khan Communication Officer CCO
Mr. Zeeshan Haider Admin & Finance Officer CCO
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
18/98
8
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
4. LimitationsThe primary limitation was the availability of information. In general, information about child rights
institutions in developed countries was more readily available, and more comprehensive, than
information from equivalent sources in less developed countries. In the latter cases, the institutions
tended to be newer, and they often did not have fully functioning websites or publications
available online. Some institutions did not respond to written or oral requests for information
within the available timeframe. Further, some information regarding national human rights
institutions in other countries was not available in English. This was particularly the case with
regard to member states of the Ibero-American Network of Ombudspersons for Children.
Unfortunately detailed information on countries within this network was not accessible to the
author. With regard to the situation analysis in Pakistan, it was not possible to visit Balochistan or
Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa given security issues, time and budgetary constraints (the project was
completed in ten weeks).
Additionally, where information was available, the type of information was sometimes limited to
descriptive studies of the mandate and powers of the particular institution(s). Despite the
proliferation of child rights institutions globally, there is relatively little comparative analysis of the
effectiveness of different models. Indeed, relatively few such institutions have been evaluated, and
fewer still have been evaluated independently10
. This lacuna is a major factor supporting the
consultants recommendation that an independent evaluation be commissioned for the Childrens
Complaint Office (at both federal and provincial levels) within three to five years, so that progress
10 The exceptions are Norway and Croatia, where evaluations of the Child Ombudsmen have beenconducted. In Norway the review was conducted by a Committee appointed by the relevant
government Ministry, and was thus not independent. In Croatia the evaluation was conducted by apanel of independent experts including a member of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, a
representative from the UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, and experts from the University of Zagreband the Croatian Institute of Social Research. The Norwegian and Croatian reports are relied upon in
this study.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
19/98
9
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
can be measured against identifiable indicators and the medium and long term objectives of the
office reassessed.
Against this backdrop of limitations on the availability and quality of information, it is significant
that the results of three important studies were not yet available to be incorporated into this
project. The first is the Global Study on Ombudswork for Children currently being conducted at the
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre in Florence. The results of the study will be available in mid-
2011. It is expected to be a comprehensive survey of international childrens institutions, including
a comparative analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of different models, yielding
recommendations for the establishment and development of global Ombudsinstitutions. The
second study of relevance is being conducted by the Australian Human Rights Centre at the Faculty
of Law, University of New South Wales, and will analyse the role and effectiveness of different
institutions in the Asia Pacific region. The third study is the independent review of the Childrens
Commissioner for England which has recently been announced by the UK Parliament. This is the
first time that the office has been reviewed and the results are due in November 201011
. It is
anticipated that the results of these studies, had they been available at the time of writing, would
have been helpful for this report.
11 The Terms of Reference of the review and the details of its consultations are available on the website
of the UK Department of Education:http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=consultationDetails&consultationId=17
26&external=no&menu=1 [last accessed 30 August 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
20/98
10
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
5. Situational Analysisa) Government bodiesThe key federal government agencies in Pakistan with a mandate related to child rights are: the
National Commission for Child Welfare and Development (NCCWD); the proposed successor to the
NCCWD in the National Commission on the Rights of Children; the Ministry of Human Rights; and
the proposed National Commission on Human Rights. At the provincial level there are separate
bodies of varying strength and effectiveness. There are no independent child rights institutions at
any level.
NCCWD is a body located within the federal Ministry of Social Welfare and Special Education. Its
mandate is to:
assess the impact of the constitutional, legal and administrative provisions having
bearing on welfare and development of children and suggest measures to provide
full opportunities for their complete growth12
.
NCCWD played an integral role in developing National Plan of Action for Children in 2006, a review
of which is now pending. It has also developed a draft National Child Protection Policy, but that
policy has not yet been adopted. As noted by the Committee of the Rights of the Child in its
Concluding Observations for Pakistan in 2009, NCCWD has limited power to promote or implement
change13
. It lacks an explicit statutory basis, has extremely limited human and financial resources
(despite its broad mandate to cover child welfare and development across the whole of Pakistan)
and importantly, unlike the Ombudsman, it is not independent of the government. There is no
12 Website of the National Commission for Child Welfare and Development, [lastaccessed 9 September 2010].13 CRC Concluding Observations: Pakistan, October 2009, ibid, pp3-4.
http://www.nccwd.gov.pk/http://www.nccwd.gov.pk/8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
21/98
11
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
equivalent body in the provinces, and coordination between federal, provincial and local levels is
minimal.
NCCWD is criticized as toothless by non-government organizations in Pakistan14
. Even the director
of the NCCWD frankly acknowledges that NCCWD is not given sufficient respect or attention by the
government15
. This is reflected in the governments failure to pass the draft bill which would confer
a clear statutory basis and mandate on the NCCWD. Mr Mangis suggestion to enhance the
reputation and import attached to the NCCWD is to relocate it to another Ministry other than
Social Welfare, since Social Welfare is in his view accorded less importance by the government16
.
Pakistans strongly hierarchical bureaucracy also means that the rank of the civil servant who heads
the NCCWD is an important factor to take into account. A further potential issue affecting the
NCCWD is the uncertainty about the survival of some federal ministries, including Social Welfare,
after the 18th
Amendment to the Pakistani Constitution comes into force in mid-2011 and
jurisdiction over social welfare is devolved to the provinces.
The Ministry of Human Rights is a newly established federal Ministry. Its mandate and
responsibilities are as yet unclear, and it has not yet developed rules of business. There is some
discussion in the Ministry about the possibility of establishing a Child Observatory Cell and a human
rights complaint service within the Ministry of Human Rights but these discussions are in a very
14 Interview conducted by the consultant with Mr Arshad Mahmood, Director, SPARC, 7 September
2010, Islamabad; interview conducted by the consultant with Mr Qindeel Shujaat, CynosureConsultants, 7 September 2010, Islamabad; see also criticisms from local NGOs reported in Dawn News,
Demand for Legislation to Protect Child Rights, 4 February 2010, available at [last accessed 23 September2010].15 Intervie0 conducted by the consultant with Mr Hasan Mangi, Director, NCCWD, 7 September 2010,Islamabad.16 Interview
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
22/98
12
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
early stage and the process of drafting rules of business has not yet begun17
. There are no
equivalent departments in the provinces of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan or Sindh, but in
Punjab there is a combined Law, Parliamentary and Human Rights Department.
A proposal to establish a National Human Rights Commission in Pakistan was made in 2005, with a
draft bill developed to that effect. The Bill has not yet been introduced into the National Assembly.
There is also a proposal to establish a National Commission on the Rights of Children, which would
take the place of the NCCWD, but this proposal has progressed little since it was first made in 2001.
There are no independent provincial-level institutions for the protection of child rights, though
there are separate agencies and departments with different mandates and varying levels of
effectiveness. These are: Provincial Commissions for Child Welfare and Development (PCCWDs) in
every province; the Child Protection and Welfare Bureau in Punjab, the Child Protection and
Welfare Commission in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and Child Protection Units in Sindh and Balochistan.
All of these bodies are located within the Social Welfare departments in their respective provinces.
b) Ombudsmans OfficesThe institution of the Ombudsman is the only independent government body with a human rights
mandate in Pakistan. The first Ombudsman was created at the federal level under the
Establishment of the Office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Federal Ombudsman) Order, which was
promulgated by the President in 1983. Its Secretariat is located at Zero Point, Islamabad, and there
are eight regional offices. The role of the federal office is to receive and respond to complaints
about maladministration of public power within the areas of federal jurisdiction. In addition there
are several independent Ombudsmen at the federal level with specific portfolios such as tax and
banking.
17 Interview by Qindeel Shujaat at the Ministry of Human Rights on 4 June 2010, reported in ChildRights: Theory and Practice Cynosure Consultants, study commissioned by the Childrens Complaints
Office with the support of UNICEF, forthcoming in 2010.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
23/98
13
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
The lead established by the federal government was later followed by the provinces. In Sindh, Act
No. 1 of 1992 established the Provincial Ombudsman. Punjab issued an Ordinance creating a
Provincial Ombudsmans Office in 1996, which was amended by two subsequent ordinances before
the Punjab Office of the Ombudsman Bill was ultimately passed by the Provincial Assembly in 1997.
The Punjab and Sindh Acts were largely modeled on the federal ordinance. In Punjab, similar
regulations have also been passed, but no regulations exist in Sindh. A draft set of regulations has
been prepared by and a review committee has been formed by the Provincial Ombudsman Sindh,
but the process has been underway for some 18 months and there is no specific timeframe for its
conclusion. The Office of the Ombudsman Balochistan was established by an executive Ordinance
in 2001. The Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Ombudsman Ordinance of 2010 established a parallel
institution in KPK.
The Provincial Ombudsmen, like the Federal Ombudsman, have jurisdiction over complaints
relating to the maladministration of public power. Importantly, they do not have jurisdiction over
abuses committed by private persons. Since Pakistans federation is quite decentralized, the bulk of
government jurisdiction lies with the provinces. This includes jurisdiction over important childrens
issues such as education, health, social welfare, juvenile justice and labour. The federal government
has jurisdiction over all of those issues if they occur in Islamabad Capital Territory and/or the
Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), as well as other issues within the federal mandate such
as immigration, security and the armed forces. Since Ombuds offices in Pakistan only have
jurisdiction with respect to maladministration of public power, their jurisdiction mirrors the
distribution of powers between the federal and provincial governments.
In late 2008 partnerships were developed between UNICEF, the Federal Ombudsman, and
Provincial Ombudsmen for Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan. At that time, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa was
the only province which did not have an Ombudsmans office. Negotiations began between UNICEF
and the Law Department for the establishment of an Ombuds office in that province (which was
then called North West Frontier Province, or NWFP). In early 2009, Childrens Complaint Offices
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
24/98
14
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
were established within the Federal Ombudsmans Office and the Provincial Ombudsmen for Sindh,
Punjab and Balochistan respectively. Those offices have now been operational for approximately
18 months.
The main focus of the CCOs in Punjab, Sindh and at the federal level so far is to raise awareness of
the existence of the office through media campaigns, school visits, workshops and seminars with
government agencies and civil society organisations. The federal CCO has also made efforts to
make the website of the Ombudsmans office more child friendly, with a link to a separate page
about the CCO, and a facebook group established. The Punjab CCO has conducted visits to several
prisons in the province and has reported to the Inspector-Generals of each prison with regard to
conditions for children18
.
In addition to the awareness-raising and complaint-handling functions which are replicated at the
provincial levels, the federal CCO focuses on strengthening institutional capabilities for protecting
child rights. This has occurred through the establishment of a Child Rights Steering Committee,
chaired by the CCO and comprising representatives of the Ministries of Interior, Health, Youth
Affairs, Capital Development Authority (CDA), Law, Human Rights, Labour, Education, Social
Welfare, the National Police Bureau, the Federal Investigative Agency (FIA), and several NGOs. The
objectives of the Steering Committee are to monitor Pakistans compliance with the CRC and to
review progress towards realising the National Plan of Action. The first meeting of the Steering
Committee was held on 29 September 2010 and the discussion emphasised the importance of
breaking down the National Plan of Action into a subsidiary plan identifying specific steps which
each Ministry could adopt19
.
18 See, eg, Punjab Childrens Complaint Office Report Visit to Borstal Institute and Juvenile Jail
Faisalabad (undated, on file with the author).19 Minutes of the Preliminary Meeting of the Child Rights Steering Committee, prepared by the CCO on
29 September 2010 (on file with the author).
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
25/98
15
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
The federal CCO includes a separate staff of five people (a project Coordinator, a Communications
officer, a Training and Research Officer, a Monitoring and Evaluation Officer and an Admin and
Finance Officer) located in office space made available by the Federal Ombudsman within the main
premises. The Head of the CCO, Mr Ejaz Qureshi, was appointed by the Federal Ombudsman to that
role. Thus far, the budget of the CCO is provided entirely by UNICEF. At the federal level, some 200
complaints have been received by the CCO in the 18 months since its establishment, which includes
complaints made by children, parents, non-government organizations (NGOs) and some incidents
picked up by CCO staff from the newspapers. These are reported, graphed and analysed in a
biannual publication20
. The majority of complaints received thus far have related to the education
sector.
The Punjab CCO consists of a permanent staff of five people, including a Programme Officer,
Communications Officer, Focal Person, an Admin and Finance Officer, and a consultant
psychologist. The two posts for specialist Child Investigation Officers (one male, one female) are
currently vacant. The office is located in part of a building provided by the Provincial Ombudsman
Punjab, with a budget provided entirely by UNICEF at this stage. To date there have been 230
complaints, some of which have been referred to the Child Protection and Welfare Bureau for
action to be taken by police. Traumatic cases (such as allegations of child abuse, or disputes over
child custody) are referred to the consultant psychologist, which has occurred in 22 cases so far.
Individual files are kept in hard copy and a summary of the information is recorded on a computer
database. The majority of complaints in Punjab have also related to education.
The Sindh CCO is headed by the Assistant Registrar of the Office, who has adopted the role of Focal
Person in addition to his regular duties. The Sindh Ombudsman has provided a small office area in
the premises of the main office, and the Governor of Sindh made a verbal commitment to
contribute five million rupees to the CCO, though there is no timeframe for this commitment and at
20 See, e.g. Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat, Review Report of the Childrens Complaint Office, January
July 2010 (on file with the author).
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
26/98
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
27/98
17
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
complaint. The extent to which this requirement limits accessibility of the office to children is
unclear.
c) Civil Society OrganizationsCivil society includes, but is not limited to, non-government organizations. It also includes media
organizations, employer groups, trade unions, teacher associations and other groups, all of which
should be included in the communications strategy of the Childrens Complaints Office. Some NGOs
with a key role to play in the development and outreach of the CCO are outlined in more detail
below.
The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) is a registered non-government organization
with a presence in every district. HRCP obtains information about violations of human rights across
a range of areas, including childrens rights. The primary sources of information are HRCP field
officers, and a media monitoring hub located in its Lahore office. Newspaper cuttings are collated
and stored and the information compiled into a comprehensive annual report on the state of
human rights in Pakistan. These are currently in the process of being digitized but this is a slow and
painstaking process. HRCP is a member of the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development
(FORUM-ASIA), which works closely with the Asia Pacific Forum in promoting, supporting and
developing NHRIs across the region.
The Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (SPARC) is an established NGO which
operates across Pakistan. It produces an annual report on the state of child rights in Pakistan and
was the leading NGO coordinating the shadow report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child
during the last periodic report in 2009. The primary source of SPARCs information about the
violation of child rights is its Child Rights Committees in 50 districts across Pakistan. These Child
Rights Committees are comprised of local volunteers such as teachers, lawyers, social workers,
journalists and other activists. The Child Rights Committees are currently confined to Punjab, Sindh
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
28/98
18
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa but SPARC plans to establish five new committees in Balochistan in the
near future. Committee members receive training from SPARC on child rights, as well as on
monitoring, reporting and other roles, to help ensure that violations are reported in the press.
SPARC also monitors news reports in its provincial offices, but unlike HRCP it does not have a
centrally coordinated database.
Lawyers for Human Rights and Legal Aid (LHRLA) is an NGO with solid credentials in advocating for
child rights. LHRLA is based in Karachi and runs a child helpline, Madadgaar, which operates in
Sindh only23
. LHRLA has advocated for a Childrens Ombudsperson in Pakistan for some years and
has developed an informal referral system with the Provincial Ombudsman Sindh in relation to
childrens complaints.
Civil society groups and organizations perform important advocacy functions. However they also
reveal an important gap in the system of child protection, since they have limited access to the
government, no binding or authoritative powers with respect to federal or provincial agencies, and
in some cases their relationship with the government can only be described as tense (at best).
In contrast, an independent child ombudssystem would have the status of a state institution with
access to government [which] is the institutions distinguishing feature vis a vis civil society24
.
NGOs and civil society organizations cannot have the stature, permanence, or influence with
government of an independent national human rights institution.
23 See Madadgaar Helpline [last accessed 10 September 2010].24 Kieren Fitzpatrick and Catherine Renshaw, NHRIs in the Asia-Pacific Region, Paper Presented toWorkshop Organised by Harvard Law School and NYU, September 2009, available at
[last accessed 30 August 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
29/98
19
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Mapping Pakistans Child Rights Institutions
Civil SocietyOrganisations
NonIndependentGovernment
Bodies
IndependentHuman Rights
Institutions
Children's ComplaintOffices of the Federal and
Provincial Ombudsmen
National Commission forChild Welfare and
Development (NCCWD)(Social Welfare Ministry)
Human RightsCommission of Pakistan
Society for the Protectionof the Rights of the Child
(SPARC)Provincial Commissionsfor Child Welfare and
Development (PCCWD)(Social WelfareDepartment)
Lawyers for Human Rightsand LEgal Aid (LHRLA)
Other NGOs and CSOs;media etc.
Federal Ministry ofHuman Rights
Proposed NationalCommission on the Rightsof Children (Federal Only)
Proposed National
Commission on HumanRights (Federal Only)
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
30/98
20
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
6. International Best Practice on Child RightsMonitoring
What follows is a description of the main functions and characteristics of child rights institutions in
a number of different countries. In countries with a federal structure, or other decentralized
models, a brief overview of both central and regional mechanisms is provided.
a) United KingdomStructure
The United Kingdom of Great Britain is a unitary state with a population of approximately 62
million people. It is comprised of the four countries of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern
Ireland. The constituent countries have only those powers which are devolved to them by the
state.
The UK has a central Equality and Human Rights Commission, and separate Childrens
Commissioners in each of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. In addition, there is a
range of specialist Ombudsmen offices in the UK with the power to receive and respond to
individual complaints relating to maladministration. They include: the Office of the Parliamentary
Commissioner (Ombudsman), the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, the Local
Government Ombudsman and the Financial Ombudsman Service. There is no specialist Childrens
Ombudsman in the UK, and no Childrens Commissioner at the central government level.
Central government
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has jurisdiction over all four countries of the
UK: England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It was established under the Equality Act 2006
and its main functions are to monitor human rights and equality legislation and make proposals for
change. There are no child-specific functions, and no childrens representative at the central
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
31/98
21
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
government level. Individual Commissioners do not have specific portfolios. However the EHRC
does have a separate Disability Committee, established as a subsidiary organ of the Commission.
There is no individual complaint service at the EHRC. However it does provide an information and
advice helpline, from which it identifies cases which are appropriate for initiating or supporting
legal action, or for alternative dispute resolution.
The EHRC is developing an Equality Management Framework to compile and measure
disaggregated data across a range of indicators, including data related to children. Aside from this
information collection and monitoring function, the role of the EHRC with respect to children is
quite limited.
Country-level Childrens Commissioners
In addition there are separate Childrens Commissioners for each constituent country of the UK.
The Childrens Commissioner for England was established under the Childrens Act 2004; there is a
separate Childrens Commission for Wales and there are Commissioners for Children and Young
People in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
The Childrens Commissioner for England, like the Scottish and the Welsh Commissioners, has no
individual complaint/casework function; this is specifically excluded by s2(7) of the Act. However
where an individual childs case raises issues of public policy of relevance to other children the
Commissioner may hold an inquiry to investigate and make recommendations about those issues
(s3). That power is suo moto, but the Secretary of State can also request that a particular inquiry
should take place (s4). The Secretary of States power to direct that an investigation be conducted
has been criticised by NGOs as compromising the independence of the office25
.
25 See, eg, Childrens Rights Alliance for England, Joint Statement from Childrens Commissioner Review
NGO Co-ordinating Group, available at
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
32/98
22
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
In contrast to the English, Welsh and the Scottish Commissioners, the Childrens Commissioner in
Northern Ireland has the power to receive and investigate individual complaints, regardless of
whether they raise broader policy issues. All offices in the UK run an information and enquiry
service in the form of a helpline. They each have structures for participation and advice from
children, such as the Children and Young Peoples Advisory Group of the English Commissioner26
,
the School Ambassadors programme run by the Welsh Commissioner27
, and the strategy for
children and youth participation in the work of the Scottish Commissioner28
.
Coordination
There is no formal relationship between the Equality and Human Rights Commission and any of the
Childrens Commissioners in each country, and there is no referral mechanism. Indeed, they have
only recently begun to establish a working relationship and to identify potential areas of
collaboration29
.
Cooperation between Childrens Commissioners in the four different countries is informal. They
worked together to produce a shadow report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child on the
UKs compliance with the CRC30
. The lack of coordination in other areas has been criticized by the
Committee on the Rights of the Child as follows:
statement-from-childrens-commissioners-review-ngo-co-ordinating-group.html> [last accessed 2
September 2010].26 See website of the Childrens Commissioner at
[last accessed 2
September 2010].
27 See [last accessed 2 September 2010].28 Scotlands Commissioner for Children and Young People, Participation Strategy 2005: Children and
Young People with us Every Step of the Way, available at [last accessed 2 September 2010].29 Correspondence between the author and Liz Speed, Research Manager, UK Equality and Human
Rights Commission, August to September 2010.30 UK Childrens Commissioners Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, report
available through the website of the Scotland Commissioner for Children and Young People
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
33/98
23
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
The Committee notes that the State party functions with devolved government
arrangements and that this system makes it difficult to have a single body
coordinating implementation of the Convention. [] Nonetheless, the Committee
remains concerned at the lack of a body mandated to coordinate and evaluate a
comprehensive and effective implementation of the Convention throughout the State
party, including at local level31
.
The Committee on the Rights of the Child has also expressed concern that the Childrens
Commissioners do not have sufficient complaint handling procedures, and that they are not
sufficiently independent so as to fully comply with the Paris Principles32
.
Assessment
The Childrens Commissions in the United Kingdom are all relatively new institutions. None of them
have been evaluated, although an evaluation of the English Commission has now been
commissioned and is expected to be released by the end of 201033
. The criticisms from the
Committee on the Rights of the Child demonstrate: the importance of coordination between
institutions at different levels of government; the need for comprehensive complaint services; and
the requirement of full independence from government.
[last accessed 10 August2010].31 Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties underArticle 44 of the Convention, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland Forty-ninth session, CRC/C/GBR/CO/4, 20 October 2008, pp3-4.32 CRC Concluding Observations: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, ibid., p4.33 See UK Department of Education:http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=consultationDetails&consultationId=17
26&external=no&menu=1 [last accessed 30 August 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
34/98
24
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
b) Republic of IrelandStructureIreland is a unitary state with a population of approximately 4.5 million people. It has an
independent Human Rights Commission, established in 2000, and a dedicated Ombudsperson for
Children, established in 2002. The Irish Human Rights Commission does not handle individual
complaints, but the Ombudsperson for Children has that capacity. Commissioners of the Irish
Human Rights Commission do not have specific portfolios or responsibilities.
Ombudsperson for Children
Ireland established an independent Ombudsperson for Children pursuant to the Ombudsperson for
Children Act 2002. The office has a broad mandate covering three main areas: (1) complaints
handling; (2) communication and participation; and (3) research and policy.
The complaint handling function is broader than the equivalent functions in the Childrens
Commissioners in all countries of the UK, with the exception of Northern Ireland. The Irish
Ombudsperson for Children has produced useful guidelines on investigations and complaint
handling, based on reviews of guidelines adopted by other child rights institutions, independent
research and consultation with children and young people34
. In addition to receiving and
investigating all individual complaints, the Irish Ombudsperson for Children conducts inquiries into
systemic issues affecting children. Examples of such issues include: the procedures for investigating
child deaths; the plight of separated children; and the question of whether there is adequate
recognition of childrens rights in the Irish Constitution35
.
34 The guidelines are available at
and
[last accessed 12 September 2010].35 See [last accessed 10 August 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
35/98
25
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
The communication and participation function includes consultation with children and young
people through a range of avenues. There is a Youth Advisory Panel, the members of which serve
two-year terms. The Panel provides advice to the Ombudsperson and produces a Young Peoples
Annual Report, as well as other tasks36
. In addition, each year the Ombudsperson and her staff
conduct school visits around the country and convene focus groups of children and young people in
order to hear their concerns. Comments and concerns by children are compiled into a report which
describes the issues raised but maintains the anonymity of the children37
.
The research and policy function has included making a number of submissions to the Irish
Parliament on issues such as child protection, medical care for children, and student behaviour38
.
The Ombudspersons office also gives written advice to the government about the impact of
proposed legislation on children39
.
Appointment of the Ombudsperson is by the President upon a resolution passed by the Parliament.
Conditions for removal from the office are strictly limited and essentially relate only to serious ill
health or gross misconduct (s3 of the Act). Interviews for the Ombudsperson were conducted by a
panel of 15 children and young people from across Ireland40
.
36 More information about the Youth Advisory Panel is available at [last accessed 10 August 2010].37 What Children and Young People Care About Issues Raised by Children and Young People with our
Office in 2008, available at [last accessed 12 September 2010].38 See [last accessed 12
September 2010].39 See [last accessed 12 September
2010].40 See Dorothy Butler Scally, Report on the Selection Processes for the Appointment of the Irish
Ombudsman for Children, Public Appointments Service,
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
36/98
26
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Coordination
Since Ireland is a small unitary state, there is no need for a regional or provincial coordination
mechanism. Beyond the borders of the Republic, there is an informal association called the British
and Irish Network of Ombudspersons and Childrens Commissioners, which does not meet regularly
and does not have a permanent secretariat. It met for the first time in 200541
.
Assessment
The Irish model is strong in all three of its areas of complaint handling, communication and
participation, and research and policy. It has a high degree of independence from the government,
mandated in the establishing legislation, and has broad ranging powers to inspect premises,
compel production of documents, and table reports to parliament. In these respects it has been
commended by the Committee on the Rights of the Child42
. However some concerns have been
expressed about the limitations on the Ombudspersons powers with respect to inspection of
prisons and police stations. The Committee has expressed concern that these limits on the
Ombudspersons powers could lead to gaps in implementation of the Convention43
.
41 Press release, Logan attends first meeting of British and Irish Network of Ombudsman and
Commissioners for Children, 16 August 2005, available at [last accessed 2 September 2010].42 Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under
Article 44 of the Convention, Concluding Observations: Ireland Forty-third session, CRC/C/IRL/CO/2,29 September 2006.43 CRC Concluding Observations: Ireland, ibid., pp3-4.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
37/98
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
38/98
28
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
State-level Childrens Commissioners
The childrens commissioners in the Australian states are:
New South Wales Commission for Children and Young People; New South Wales Office for Children the Childrens Guardian; Australian Capital Territory Children & Young Peoples Commissioner; Northern Territory Childrens Commissioner; Queensland Commission for Children and Young People and Child Guardian; South Australia Guardian for Children and Young People; Commissioner for Children, Tasmania; Child Safety Commissioner, Victoria; Western Australian Commissioner for Children and Young People.
Each of these institutions has a statutory basis and the office holders are appointed by the
executive. Their mandates are generally broad, and most (but not all) have the capacity to receive
and respond to individual complaints. The Queensland and Tasmanian Commissioners have
specifically enumerated functions to inspect places of detention and residential institutions for
children. In NSW, Queensland and Victoria the Commissioners are charged with investigating child
deaths45
. In some states the Childrens Commissioner is responsible for conducting background
checks on individuals seeking employment related to children. Some states, but not all, have young
45 A table with comparisons of the different roles of the respective state-based mechanisms in Australiais available for download from the European Network of Ombudspersons for Children (ENOC) website:
[last accessed 1 August 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
39/98
29
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
peoples advisory groups and committees. Some Commissioners have the power to conduct
inquiries into systemic issues affecting children, but only with prior ministerial approval46
. Perhaps
for this reason, just one inquiry has been conducted in NSW since its establishment in 199847.
Coordination
As in the UK, there is no formal coordination between the Australian Human Rights Commissioners
and the various state-based bodies. Coordination largely happens on an ad hoc basis. The
Committee on the Rights of the Child has expressed concern about the lack of a dedicated child
rights institution or focal person at the federal level48
. The Committee suggested the appointment
of a member of the Australian Human Rights Commission with specific responsibility for children,
and the creation of specialized sections within the state and territory Ombudsmen to deal with
childrens issues49
.
Assessment
Like the UK, Australias network of child rights institutions is quite decentralized. The state-based
mechanisms are quite strong in their policy and research roles, but the Committee on the Rights ofthe Child has criticized the absence of a central coordinating mechanism at the federal level. This
may explain some of the differences between the models adopted in each state and, significantly, it
may result in uneven implementation of the Convention. For example, some states are
insufficiently independent from the government, such as the Commissioner for Children in
Tasmania, where investigations by the Commissioner require prior Ministerial request50
. Other
46 Commission for Children and Young People Act NSW 1998, s 11(c).47 NSW Commission for Children and Young People, Submission to the Statutory Review of theCommission for Children and Young People Act 1998, 31 May 2010.48 Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties underArticle 44 of the Convention, Concluding Observations: Australia Fortieth session, CRC/C/15/Add.268,
20 October 2005, pp4.49 CRC Concluding Observations: Australia, ibid.50 Children, Young Persons and their Families Act 1997 Tasmania, s 79.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
40/98
30
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
states lack a complaint handling function altogether51
, a lacuna which has been criticized in other
contexts by the Committee on the Rights of the Child52
. Some of these problems may be rectified if
the current proposal to establish a federal Office of the Commissioner for Children and Young
People passes into law53
.
51 Eg Commission for Children and Young People Act 1998 NSW, s 16.52 CRC Concluding Observations: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, ibid., p4.53 See Sarah Hanson-Young MP, Second Reading Speech Commonwealth Commissioner for Children
and Young People Bill 2010, 12 May 2010, available at [last accessed 19 September 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
41/98
31
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
d) New ZealandStructureNew Zealand is a unitary state with a population of approximately 4.5 million. It has a national
Human Rights Commission and a Childrens Commissioner at the central government level. Both
institutions have individual complaint handling functions, as well as advocacy, communication and
research roles. The Human Rights Commission includes two specific Commissioners dedicated to
Race Relations and Equal Employment Opportunities respectively. There are also six commissioners
with general mandates across all human rights issues.
Although the Human Rights Commission does not have a representative or focal person for
children, that role is fulfilled by a separate, independent institution with broad jurisdiction and a
high public profile across New Zealand. Because of the particular disadvantage faced by indigenous
Maori children, there is a debate about the possibility of introducing a separate Iwi Maori
Childrens Commissioner in New Zealand54
.
Childrens Commissioner
The New Zealand Childrens Commissioner was established under the Children, Young Persons and
their Families Act in 1989, but its current roles and responsibilities are set out in the Childrens
Commissioner Act 2003. It has a broad mandate independent of the government to promote the
rights of children, investigate individual complaints, and conduct advocacy, by and on behalf of,
children. The Commissioner is appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the executive.
A Young Peoples Reference Group consisting of children aged 12 to 18 from around New Zealand
provides information and advice to the Commissioner on a regular basis55
. Applications are
54 John Barrington, A Voice for Children: Office of the Commissioner for Children in New Zealand 1984-
2003, Dunmore Press Ltd, Wellington 2004, pp113.55 See the website of the Childrens Commissioner at [last accessed 1
September 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
42/98
32
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
advertised widely across the country. The individuals selected serve two year terms. They meet
four times per year, with all costs covered by the Childrens Commissioner, and participate in
teleconferences monthly. The Young Peoples Reference Group advises the Commissioner on what
is important to young people, it reaches out to children and young people across the country,
organizes events for young people, and also produces its own childrens newsletter.
The Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern in 2003 about the possibility of
duplication between human rights institutions in New Zealand, and the lack of adequate financial
resources to the Commissioner for Children. The Committee recommended that New Zealand:
ensure that the Office of the Commissioner for Children and the National Human
Rights Commission are equally independent and that they report to the same
political body, and to define the relationship between the two institutions, including
a clear division of their respective activities. In addition, the Committee urges the
State party to ensure that the Office of the Commissioner for Children receives
sufficient human, material and financial resources to carry out its mandate56
.
Since that time, significant changes have occurred, including an increase in funding to the office by
20% in the year 2009-201057
, and the development of strategic workplans for the Childrens
Commissioner58
.
56 Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under
Article 44 of the Convention, Concluding Observations: New Zealand Thirty fourth session,CRC/C/15/Add.216, 27 October 2003, pp4.57 Report of the New Zealand Childrens Commissioner to the UN CRC 2010, 2 September 2010, pp11,available at
[lastaccessed 19 September 2010].58 See Statement of Intent 2009-12, tabled in the New Zealand Parliament in July 2009, available at [last accessed
12 September 2010].
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
43/98
33
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Assessment
The New Zealand Childrens Commissioner is a good model which balances individual casework
functions with broader research, reporting and advocacy roles. It was one of the first independent
child rights institutions in the world and has thus had some considerable time to develop and
review its functioning. Its independence from the government is set out in legislation and there is a
permanent structure for the involvement of children and young people in its work. However, the
lesson which may be drawn from the early experience of the New Zealand Childrens Commissioner
is that it is important to clearly delineate the different roles and responsibilities of each human
rights institution. New Zealand also provides a good example of effective channels for
communication with children and young people, in the form of the Young Peoples Reference
Group, which mirrors the equivalent group in Ireland.
e) CanadaStructure
Canada is a federal state. It has ten provinces and three territories, and the distribution of powers
is highly decentralized with the bulk of government powers exercised by the provinces. As in
Australia and the UK, there is a Human Rights Commission at the central government level, and
child-specific institutions in each of the provinces.
Federal Government
The Canadian Human Rights Commission was created under the Canadian Human Rights Act 1985.
The Commissioners do not have specific portfolios and there is no dedicated representative for
children. The Commission receives individual complaints alleging discriminatory practices,
conducts investigations and has the power to appoint conciliators where necessary. There is also a
separate Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for litigation of complaints arising under the Canadian
Human Rights Act.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
44/98
34
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
The Commission is also responsible for: public information programs to raise human rights
awareness; human rights research; reporting, receiving and making recommendations on human
rights; reviewing prospective legislation and trying to discourage discriminatory practices. It reports
annually to the Parliament on its activities over the course of the previous year (s27 of the Act).
Provincial Child Advocates
Nine of the ten Canadian provinces have separate child-specific offices, usually referred to as Child
Advocates. Each office was created by provincial-level legislation and is funded by the government
in that state. Most have individual complaint handling procedures, and may conduct investigations,
inquiries, manage alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and may make recommendations to
government, agencies, or communities. However, their core function is to provide highly
individualised case advocacy59
.
The provincial offices are:
Representative for Children and Youth, British Columbia Office of the Child and Youth Advocate, Newfoundland and Labrador Office of the Childrens Advocate, Manitoba Office of the Child and Family Service Advocacy of Ontario Saskatchewan Childrens Advocate Office Child and Youth Advocate, Alberta Nova Scotia Childrens Ombudsman
59 Robin MacLean and Brian Howe, Brief Report on Canadian Provincial Children and Youth AdvocacyOffices: Highlights of Functions and Recent Activities, Child Rights Centre, Cape Breton University,
August 2009.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
45/98
35
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Quebec Commission For Human Rights and Youth Rights New Brunswick Child and Youth Advocate.
The British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Ontario Advocates also play a role in the investigation of
child deaths. The Alberta and Nova Scotia offices have particular focuses on welfare services for
children, and children in residential care (including juvenile detention), respectively60
. Some, but
not all, offices have established mechanisms for participation of children and young people such as
youth groups. Some, but not all, offices are fully independent of the government.
Coordination
The lack of a child-specific institution at the federal level, or Child Advocate to mirror the
equivalent institutions in the provinces, has been strongly criticised in Canada61
. As in Australia and
the UK, there is no formal relationship between the federal-level Human Rights Commission and
the provincial-level Youth Advocates. However there is an annual coordination meeting of all
childrens rights institutions at the provincial level, known as the Canadian Council of Provincial
Child and Youth Advocates. The lack of a hierarchy between those institutions has been a source of
some criticism62
. In particular, as in the UK and Australia, the fact that there is no Childrens
Advocate or Child Ombudsman at the federal level means that coordination suffers between the
provinces and territories63
. The Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended that:
60 Robin MacLean and Brian Howe, ibid.61 Robin MacLean and Brian Howe, ibid.62 Telephone interview with Vanessa Sedletzki, Child Rights Officer, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre,31 August 2010.63 Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties underArticle 44 of the Convention, Concluding Observations: Canada Thirty fourth session,
CRC/C/15/Add.215, 27 October 2003, pp4.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
46/98
36
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
the State party establish at the federal level an ombudsmans office responsible
for childrens rights and ensure appropriate funding for its effective functioning. It
recommends that such offices be established in the provinces that have not done so,
as well as in the three territories where a high proportion of vulnerable children
live64
.
Assessment
The Canadian provincial child advocate system is a good example of an institutional network which
focuses to a high degree on individual complaints. The range of services provided to individual
complainants is quite broad and usually includes powers of legal representation. However there is
generally less emphasis on research, policy and communication functions in the Canadian
provinces.
As in Australia, Canadas decentralized federation has resulted in significant variation between the
different provinces. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has criticized the fact that some of
Canadas most vulnerable children do not have access to a Child Advocate by reason of their
location in certain provinces or territories65
. Uneven development in child rights institutions in
different parts of the country is not necessarily a bad thing, as some states may take the lead in
certain areas and develop practices which can be shared with other provinces. However, good
coordination between federal and provincial levels is imperative to ensure that these best practices
are shared, and that there are no gaps in implementation of the Convention.
64 CRC Concluding Observations: Canada, ibid., pp4.65 CRC Concluding Observations: Canada, ibid., pp4.
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
47/98
37
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
f) NorwayStructureNorway is a unitary state with a population of approximately five million people. It is divided into
19 counties and 430 municipalities. Administration is quite decentralized with the municipalities
largely responsible for self-government. The national human rights institution for Norway is the
Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, which is located within the law faculty at the University of
Oslo. It does not have an individual complaint handling function but rather focuses on research,
advocacy and communication. The Ombudsperson for Children, in contrast, has the power to
receive and respond to individual complaints.
Ombudsman for Children
In 1981 Norway became the first country in the world to establish a Childrens Ombudsman,
through Act No. 5 of that year (The Ombudsman for Children Act).There are also regulations (called
Instructions) which are issued pursuant to the Act. Other Ombudsmen exist in Norway for specific
issues, such as the Ombudsman for Defence and the Ombudsman for Consumer Affairs. In 1993,
after 12 years of operation, an evaluation of the office of the Child Ombudsman was conducted by
the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs66
.
Mandate
The Ombudsman for Children has a broad mandate to promote the rights of children, to
investigate, criticize and publicise matters affecting their welfare, and to follow up the
development of conditions under which children grow up (Act, s3).This includes jurisdiction over
both public and private bodies.
66 Norwegian Official Report, The Commissioner for Children and Childhood in Norway (1995).
8/3/2019 International Study of Best Practices in Monitoring Childrens Rights
48/98
38
International Study of Best Practices in
Monitoring Children's Rights
Complaint handling
The Child Ombudsman can take up cases directly from individuals, at the request of other people,
and can also take suo moto notice of complaints (Instructions, s2). If the complaint relates to a child
but is not made by the child personally, the childs permission must be sought before an
investigation is conducted; however there is a power to proceed in the absence of the childs
permission in exceptional circumstances (i.e. the age of the child prevents permission from being
given: Instructions, s2). The Ombudsman has access to all public and private institutions for
children and unrestricted access to documents (Act, s4).
The complaint handling functions of the Childrens Ombudsman are reserved for cases of
significant principal value in areas that highlight particular weaknesses or gaps in legislation67
. The
1995 review concluded that the Commissioner should concentrate on general cases and questions
of principle, and work to a lesser extent on individual cases68
.
Top Related