COMMITTEE ON MIGRANT WORKERS DISCUSSES VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN, PROMOTION OF THE CONVENTION, ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS

The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families this afternoon discussed issues concerning follow-up to the Secretary-General’s study on violence against children, the status of reporting under the Convention, promotion of the Convention and organizational matters, including cooperation with other treaty bodies and treaty body reform.

Veronica Birga, Human Rights Officer serving as focal point for the issue of violence against children, said the Committee was playing an important role in monitoring States parties’ efforts to protect children from violence in the context of migration. Children were particularly vulnerable to violence in the context of migration. Children were exposed to violence and abuse when they crossed international borders in an irregular manner. Unaccompanied migrant children and children of migrant workers living in an environment without any social net or support were directly confronted with extreme social violence.

In the subsequent debate, Committee Members said, among other things, that the most vulnerable left behind were the children. Children were an extremely vulnerable sector of the population. The Committee should emphasise the issue of family reunification. Children who were left behind were preyed upon by gangs that gave children the security they were seeking. There were a number of international conventions and texts which aimed to protect the child, including from forced labour and/or unstable jobs.

During the discussion on treaty body reform, Experts spoke of the Inter-Committee Meeting, noting that most of the time at the Inter-Committee Meeting there had been discussion on how to achieve consensus on the process of harmonisation of methods of work. The treaty bodies had been given functions, rights and obligations by the treaties themselves, and the countries which had endorsed the treaties had adopted this idea. There was a greater commitment towards harmonising the work of the treaty bodies.

The Committee also held a discussion on promotion of the Convention, with Chairman Prasad Kariyawasam noting that although advocacy and promotion of the Convention were not necessarily part of the Committee’s function, it recognised the importance of these, in particular as many countries had not yet ratified the Convention. Next year was the fifth anniversary of the entry into force of the Convention, and something could perhaps be done in this regard.

Patrick Taran, Senior Migration Specialist, International Migration Programme, International Labour Organization, said he remained convinced that it was only a very assertive, if not aggressive promotion of the Convention that was required at this time. It was in a sense very clear that advocacy efforts made a huge difference.

In discussions on organisational matters, Experts also discussed the need to encourage States parties to submit their initial reports, and to develop guidelines for the periodic reports.

The next meeting of the Committee will be at 3 p.m. on Friday, 30 November, when it will conclude its seventh session and issue its concluding observations and recommendations on the initial report of Ecuador which it considered during the session.

Discussion on Follow-up to the Secretary-General’s Study on Violence against Children

VERONICA BIRGA, Human Rights Officer serving as Focal Point for the Issue of Violence against Children, said the United Nations General Assembly had called for a study on violence against children in 2001, and in 2003 the former Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Paulo Sergio Pinheiro as the Independent Expert to lead the study, which was a very participatory process. The study was presented at the General Assembly in October 2006. The study had some key messages, in particular that violence against children was not inevitable, and could be prevented; violence against children could never be justified; the best way to deal with violence was through prevention; accountability was important; and that violence threatened the survival, well-being and future prospects of children.

The study contained 12 overarching recommendations, and a number of setting-specific recommendations. These included to strengthen national and local commitment and action; to prohibit all violence against children; to prioritise prevention; to promote non-violent values and awareness-raising; and to address the gender dimension of violence against children. There had been progress since the presentation of the study, and a progress report was presented by the Independent Expert to the 62nd session of the General Assembly. A draft resolution on the rights of the child was adopted by the General Assembly on 27 November 2007. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had developed a follow-up plan for 2008-2009, which mainly aimed at integrating the study recommendations into the entire array of the Office activities.

The Committee was playing an important role in monitoring States parties’ efforts to protect children from violence in the context of migration. Children were particularly vulnerable to violence in the context of migration. Children were exposed to violence and abuse when they crossed international borders in an irregular manner. Unaccompanied migrant children and children of migrant workers living in an environment without any social net or support were directly confronted with extreme social violence. The Committee could consider a proposed list of issues to keep in mind when considering States parties’ reports.

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, Chairman of the Committee, asked whether the Committee’s scope included the children of migrant workers that had been left behind in the country of origin, as this issue was unclear.

JOSE BRILLANTES, Committee Expert, said the Committee should seize this chance to give itself an opportunity to emphasise its relevance and importance vis-à-vis the other Committees in the system.

FRANCISCO ALBA, Committee Expert, said the issue raised by the Chairperson did come under the Committee’s purview, as the Convention covered migrant workers and their families. Those who remained home were covered under a legitimate extrapolation.

ANA ELIZABETH CUBIAS MEDINA, Committee Expert, said there was a legitimate concern for children who were left behind. Women were now migrating with their children, as they had been abandoned by their own mothers who migrated, and they did not wish to repeat this history with their own children. Children who were left behind were preyed upon by gangs, who gave children the security they were seeking. The Committee should learn from mechanisms used in some countries. It should also bear in mind that there were sub-groups among the vulnerable, such as children and the elderly, and should ask questions about these groups. The most vulnerable left behind were the children.


Francisco CARRION-MENA, Committee Expert, said the Committee should not only consider the subject of migrant workers but also their family members - not just those who accompanied the workers, but also those who remained in the country of origin. Children were an extremely vulnerable sector of the population.

Ahmed Hassan EL-BORAI, Committee Expert, said the most violent act against a child was to leave the home and go abroad. The Committee should emphasise the issue of family reunification. There were a number of international conventions and texts which aimed to protect the child, including from forced labour and/or unstable jobs. The minimum wage should be guaranteed to families to protect children. Efforts should also be made to ensure that all migrant children could go to school.

MEHMET SEVIM, Committee Expert, said one of the main problems for migrant children was language, and limitation on learning the mother language. There were also sometimes limits on age for family reunification.

AZAD TAGHIZADET, Committee Expert, said the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should periodically inform the Committee of cases where there had been violations of the rights of migrant children. Had the study identified any large-scale violations of the rights of migrant children, he asked.

VERONICA BIRGA, Human Rights Officer serving as Focal Point for the Issue of Violence against Children, responding, said with regards to the scope of the Convention on protecting children from violence, this was up to the Committee to discuss, but she hoped that its interpretation would be broader rather than narrower. When looking at the situation of those left behind, obviously, if migrant women had the possibility of travelling home to visit their children on a regular basis, this would ensure the continuation of a relationship. In many cases, unfortunately, it was not possible. The issue of family reunification was very important in this context. In the context of deportation and repatriation, a lot had been done in many cases. The study, although it did not mention migration specifically, remained relevant in that context. It was true that children often joined gangs in order to feel secure.

Discussion on Treaty Body Reform

AZAD TAGHIZADET, Committee Expert, said at the Inter-Committee Meeting, the idea had emerged that the Experts at meetings did not have the right to make amendments to considerations. They had no right to change anything in terms of the functions, rights and obligations of the treaty bodies. The treaty bodies had been given these functions, rights and obligations by the treaties themselves, and the countries which had endorsed the treaties had adopted this idea. There had also been discussion as to how the Inter-Committee Meeting could interact with other bodies.

FRANCISCO ALBA, Committee Expert, said most of the time at the Inter-Committee Meeting there had been discussion on how to achieve consensus on the process of harmonisation of methods of work. Participants had tried to come up with a flexible approach on the subject. There should be at some point a move towards putting into practice some of the agreements reached. There should be two Annual Meetings of the Inter-Committee Meeting, and these meetings should come up with proposals, however, in order to safeguard not just the independence but also to give certain rights to the Committees themselves in plenary, the proposals should not be considered mandatory or obligatory, but should be handed on to the Committees for discussion. There was a need for a mechanism to put into practice the various decisions and resolutions.

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, Chairman of the Committee, said that there were two issues: the harmonisation of working methods; and the unified treaty body. The latter concept had lost steam over the last two years - and the former had gathered momentum. There was a greater commitment towards harmonising the work of the treaty bodies. When the workload increased, then the issue of a unified treaty body would return.

Ahmed Hassan EL-BORAI, Committee Expert, said the budget was an issue that was constantly under discussion. The idea of having some kind of unified body needed to be clarified - what was the point of it, he asked. With regards to the regional committees, this seemed to run counter to the main idea of human rights, which were by their very nature universal. If there was a single unified treaty body, how would it respect the individual nature of each convention, he asked.

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, Chairman of the Committee, said the Committee did not need to discuss a unified treaty body, only harmonisation of working methods.

Organisational Matters

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, Chairman of the Committee, said the Committee needed to discuss the joint work between it and the Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women. The latter Committee had agreed that there was a need for a joint meeting in order to formulate a joint comment, and now the Committee needed to propose a time and date for this, possibly during the next meeting of the Committee in April 2008.

Further, Mr. Kariyawasam said that there were 27 State party reports that were overdue, and reminders needed to be sent. Other Experts concurred, and said that the letters might need to be strengthened in this respect. Committee Members should also urge their own countries to submit their reports. The Committee needed to start work on developing guidelines for States parties’ periodic reports.

Promotion of the Convention

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, Chairman of the Committee, speaking on the promotion of the Convention, said although advocacy and promotion of the Convention were not necessarily part of the Committee’s function, it recognised the importance of these, in particular as many countries had not yet ratified the Convention. Without at least some receiving countries being actively involved in the work of the Convention, the work of the Committee would be much more difficult. The Committee should promote the Convention in that spirit. Next year was the fifth anniversary of the entry into force of the Convention, and something could perhaps be done in this regard. Next year would be the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and this could also be an opportunity. The Committee needed to begin consideration of how to do these things. One way of doing this was to, in April 2008, at the meeting, have activities in this regard.

PATRICK TARAN, Senior Migration Specialist, International Migration Programme, International Labour Organization (ILO), said he remained convinced that it was only a very assertive, if not aggressive promotion of the Convention that was required at this time. It was in a sense very clear that advocacy efforts made a huge difference. There was also an impression that the periods of ratification had usually followed periods in which non-governmental organizations, the High Commissioner and other institutions were active at the national and international levels. The process and the debate around the Global Forum on Migration and Development were particularly illustrative of this - the topic of migrant’s rights had been all but formally absent from the agenda and debate that took place in Brussels in July. The agenda for the next Global Forum, to take place in Manila in 2008, should include migrant’s rights in the agenda, and there should be increased advocacy in this regard.

The efforts of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the ILO in promotion of this Convention and of the ILO Conventions should be strengthened, Mr. Taran said. Where to go and what to do was a matter of determining an effective strategy and what to do next in a more targeted way. Considerable attention need to be paid to working with countries of the South - countries of origin, that had the most interest in protecting the rights of their citizens. Until this happened, there would not be enough pressure on the countries of the North to encourage their ratification. A lot of work could be done by encouraging countries that had already indicated their interest in ratification - and Experts, NGOs and others could all work in this regard. There should be a reorganised and reinitiated campaign to mark the fifth anniversary of the entry into force of the Convention, with the aim of reaching 41 ratifications.

Francisco CARRION-MENA, Committee Expert, said this was a vital matter for strengthening the Committee and its work. Some of the information was rather a cause for concern, but other things were encouraging. Efforts should be made jointly, with all behind them, or no progress would be made. Non-governmental organizations should be involved in the efforts to encourage ratification, as they could do a great deal. Countries were concerned by migration issues, and the United Nations and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights also had a role to play. It was important to make the necessary linkages with socio-economic factors, and all should work to unite their strengths to make sure that human rights were not seen only through an economic prism, but as something that existed in their own right. There was a need for a sustained campaign to increase ratifications, and in order to do this there was a need to show that the goals of the Committee were extremely important in human rights terms.

Ana Elizabeth CUBIAS MEDINA, Committee Expert, said the issue was who wanted to do what. There had been an increase in the number of ratifications, but it was not particularly significant. There was a need to divide up responsibilities between the Committee, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Governments and Ministries, and other bodies. Committee Experts could encourage ratification at their own national level, as well as bilaterally and regionally.

FRANCISCO ALBA, Committee Expert, said the Committee had a range of dates, such as the anniversaries, and it seemed that these gave simple opportunities to do certain things, including stocktaking of achievements. In this regard, the Committee had not much to look back on. The percentage of countries that had respected their obligation to submit reports was quite small. There were therefore clearly risks as well as opportunities with regards to stocktaking. The Committee had to be realistic about what kind of scenarios could arise, and how it would respond to criticisms that could be levelled at it.

Ahmed Hassan EL-BORAI, Committee Expert, said he had heard a lot about ratification of the Convention, but the Committee members were also supposed to promote the Convention in countries where it had already been ratified - these two were supposed to take place in parallel.

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, Chairman of the Committee, said there was a lot more to be done by the institutional actors, such as the High Commissioner, the ILO, and the United Nations. The manpower and expertise existed in the international community. The High Commissioner should have a unit in charge of promotion of the Convention. The Special Rapporteur on Migrants, Jorge Bustamante, had a role to play in promoting the Convention, and should take this as one of his main planks. The States parties should also promote the Convention. NGOs and institutional actors could do the most, and the latter could assign more funds to this purpose. There were various forums in which promotion could take place. Promotion was required on a regular basis, but also at special occasions, such as anniversaries. However, there was a need to be very careful in promotion. Momentum should be built, and the large, labour-sending countries in Africa and Asia needed to be encouraged to join the Convention.

AZAD TAGHIZADET, Committee Expert, said it might be interesting for countries of Eastern and Central Europe and of the former Soviet Union to be encouraged to accede to the Convention, as these were countries which were labour-sending. The Committee could send letters to other human rights treaty bodies and ask them to prepare surveys or studies so that when they prepared concluding observations they could include when violations affected the rights of migrant workers and their families. The Committee needed to consider the possibility of carrying out a study to demonstrate that migration had become a very important aspect of the process of development.

MEHMET SEVIM, Committee Expert, said receiving countries were talking about a new type of migration which did not fit the Convention, and resisted the Convention for this reason.

PATRICK TARAN, Senior Migration Specialist, International Migration Programme, International Labour Organization (ILO), said he appreciated the inference to the need to look ahead and take stock at the same time. There was very little academic literature on the topic of the Convention. Perhaps the Secretariat and the Officers of the Committee could formulate a day of discussion next year that could invite academic observations which could then be circulated with the aim of enriching the discussion. In consultation with the Steering Committee, responsibilities could be better allocated, so that Governments were encouraged to raise the issue of the Convention in bilateral and regional meetings. A global handbook on migrants and human rights would be published next year for parliamentarians.

FRANCISCO ALBA, Committee Expert, said the Committee needed to look carefully at bringing in experts on ethics, labour rights, and other topics, perhaps in the context of a round table.