Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T00:13:03.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Convention on the Rights of the Child

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Lawrence J. LeBlanc
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child in November, 1989, bringing to a close ten years of debate and discussion over the merits of the project as well as the content of its main provisions. Although some representatives expressed misgivings about the content of several articles of the convention, it was adopted by a broad consensus among the member states of the United Nations. In fact, in less than one year, by September, 1990, the convention had been ratified by more than twenty countries, the threshold figure established by Article 49 of the convention, and it entered into force. This set in motion the process for the election of the ten-member Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the body that has been charged with implementing the convention, in February, 1991, and it is scheduled to begin functioning in the fall of 1991. As recently as March, 1991, the United Nations Secretary-General reported to the states parties that 71 states had either ratified or acceded to the convention and that almost 60 other states had signed it. By June, 1991, the ratification of the convention by Belgium brought the total of states parties to over 90.

Type
Current Legal Developments
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , September 1991 , pp. 281 - 291
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. For the text of the convention, see UN G. A. Res. 44/25 of Nov. 20,1989.

2. See, Status of the Convention on the Rights of the Child: Note by the Secretary-General, UN CRC/SP/4, March 26,1991.

3. A recent study by Professor Ph. Alston for the United Nations highlights the numerous problems that have been faced by the committees charged with implementing the conventions against racial discrimination, torture and discrimination against women and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. See, Aston, Ph., Effective Implementation of International Instruments on Human Rights, Including Reporting Obligations Under International Instruments on Human Rights, U.N. G AOR A/44/668, Nov. 8,1989. The chairs of the treaty bodies have also met on three different occasions (in 1984,1988 and 1990) to discuss problems their committees have encountered in the implementation of their respective treaties. For Iheir most recent report, see. Effective Implementation of United Nations Instruments on Human Rights and Effective Functioning of Bodies Established Pursuant to Such Instruments: Note by the Secretary-General, U.N. GAOR A/45/636, Oct. 30, 1990. For the 1984 report, see, U.N. Doc. A/39/484 and for the 1988 report, see, U.N. Doc. A/44/98.Google Scholar

4. In contrast, it took almost three years for the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to be ratified by a sufficient number of states to enter into force. Comparable figures for the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, are two and one-half years and one and one-half years respectively.

5. At least two symposia have already been held on the convention. For the published papers, see the special issue of 58 Nordic Journal of International Law (1989) and 12 Human Rights Quarterly (1990).

6. For the most extensive application of the regime concept to human rights, see, Donnelly, J., International Human Rights: A Regime Analysis, 40 International Organization 599 (1985)Google Scholar or Donnelly, J., Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice (1989), ch. II. For a more recent application of the concept to the Inter-American human rights regime,Google Scholarsee, Forsythe, D., Human Rights, the United States and the Organization of American States, 13 Human Rights Quarterly 66 (1991). For a critique of the application of the concept to human rights,Google Scholarsee, Henderson, C., Human Rights and Regimes: A Bibliographical Essay,10 Human Rights Quarterly 525 (1988)Google Scholar

7. See, Donnelly, J., International Human Rights: A Regime Analysis, supra note 6, at 628–633.Google Scholar

8. Ceremony for the Presentation of the Declaration and Plan of Action Adopted by World Leaders at the World Summit forChildren, U.N. GAOR A/45/625, Oct. 18,1990. The Plan of Action states in part that the “aspirations of the international community for the well-being of children are best reflected in the Convention on the Rights of the Child” and it calls upon all governments “to promote earliest possible ratification and implementation of the Convention”.

9. For the text of the Geneva Declaration on the Rights of the Child, see, U.N. ECOSOC E/CN.5/44, Feb.19, 1948, at 44–50

9. For the text of the Geneva Declaration on the Rights of the Child, see, U.N. ECOSOC E/CN.5/44, Feb.19, 1948, at 44–50.of Nov.20,1959.

11. Interights, Family, Marriage and Children: Selected International Human Rights Instruments (1986).

12. Ph.Veerman, E., The Rights of the Child and the Changing Image of Childhood (1991).Google Scholar

13. The Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, with the assistance of an ad hoc committee, drew up ‘illustrative draft articles’ for a Convention on the Protection of Children and on International Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, in December, 1990. A special commission of the Conference was convened in The Hague in April–May, 1991 to prepare a draft convention on the subject that may be adopted by 1993.

14. The revised Polish draft convention, which became the ‘working document’ when the convention was drafted, can be found in Question of a Convention on the Rights of the Child, U.N. ECOSOC E/CN.4/1349, Jan. 17,1980

15. In 1978, the United Nations Secretary-General conducted a survey of states and international organizations to ascertain the level of interest in the adoption of a convention on the rights of the child.Approximately forty member states replied with comments and observations. Among specialized agencies, the 1LO, UNESCO and the WHO replied. Fourteen non-governmental organizations also replied. See, Question of a Convention on the Rights of the Child, E/CN.4/1324, and Add. 1 -5, and Corr.1, Dec. 27, 1978 through Jan. 22, 1980.

16. Id..

17. The working group published reports on each of its sessions providing a summary of the major articles discussed, proposals introduced and decisions reached. The reports were published as official documents of the UN Commission on Human Rights, usually under the title Question of a Convention on the Rights of the Child: Report of the Working Group on a Draft Convention on the Rights of the Child. For 1979,see E/CN.4/L.1468; for 1980, E/CN.4/L.1542; for 1981, E/CN.4/L.1575; for 1982, E/CN.4/I982/30/Add.l, pages 47-78; for 1983, E/CN.4/1983/62; for 1984, E/CN.4/1984/71; for 1985, E/CN.4/1985/64;for 1986, E/CN.4/1986/39; for 1987, E/CN.4/1987/25; for 1988, E/CN.4/1988/28; for 1989, E/CN.4/1989/48.

18. These generalizations are based on the data reported by the working group in each of the reports, supra note 17.

19. For the proposals thai were introduced and the discussions that surrounded them see, especially, the reports of the working group for 1988 and 1989, supra note 17.

20. The difficulty that arose in drafting Article 38 of the convention pertaining to the participation of children in armed conflict provides a good example. See Report of the Working Group on a Draft Convention on the Rights of the Child, U.N. ECOSOC E/CN.4/1989/48, March 2, 1989, at 110–116.

21. U.N. GAOR C.3, A/C.3/44/SR.44, Nov. 15, 1989, at 12–13.

22. See, Cranston, M., Human Rights Today (1962) and What are Human Rights? (1973).Google Scholar

23. See, The Limburg Principles on the Implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 9 Human Rights Quarterly 122 (1987); Vincent, R.J., Human Rights and International Relations (1986); Ph.Google Scholar, Alston, Out of the Abyss: The Challenges Confronting the New lJV.Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, 9 Human Rights Quarterly 332 (1987);Google ScholarShue, H., Basic Rights: Subsistenc, Affluence and U.S. Foreign Policy (1980);Google ScholarForsythe, D., Human Rights and World Politics (1989);Google ScholarDonnelly, J., Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice, supra note 6.Google Scholar

24. See, e.g., the study of Professor Alston, supra note 3.

25. Forsythe, D., supra note 23.Google Scholar

26. In addition to the study by Professor Alston and the reports of the chairs of the treaty bodies, supra note 3, see also Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Ph. Alston, M. Rodriguez-Bustelo, rapporteurs, Taking Stock of United Nations Human Rights Procedures (1988).Google Scholar