Committee on Rights of Child reviews Reports of Colombia under Optional Protocols

Committee on the Rights of the Child
4 June 2010

The Committee on the Rights of the Child today reviewed the initial reports of Colombia under the two Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, on the involvement of children in armed conflict and on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

Frank Pearl, High Counsellor for Peace to the Presidency of Colombia, introducing Colombia’s report under the Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, said Colombia’s security forces did not use minors, but that was unfortunately not the case for non-State armed groups. The Government had been running a re-integration programme for youth who had left the ranks of armed groups, but some minors had not yet been able to leave armed groups and self-defence units. This having been said, efforts were underway to address that situation and identify individuals who wished to leave such groups.

Elvira Forero, Director of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare, introducing Colombia’s report under the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, said the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare was in charge of the development technical guidelines and was mandated to re-establish children's rights, provide independent advice, and protect those who were at risk. In addition, the Attorney General’s Office had been handing down rulings, and the national police had been taking investigative action.

In preliminary concluding remarks, Committee Expert Susana Villaran de la Puente, who served as Rapporteur for the reports of Colombia under the two Optional Protocols, said that it had been an open and fruitful dialogue. The Committee had heard about mechanisms and procedures, but what was also needed was the full harmonization of Colombian legislation with the two Optional Protocols so as to promote and protect children's rights. The existing institutions and the coordination between them also needed to be strengthened, the Rapporteur said. She expressed hope that Colombia would take account of the comments and observations of the Committee.

With regards to the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, Committee Experts asked what human and financial resources had been given to the Office of the Attorney General, what the role of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare was in terms of coordination, whether statistics were available on the complaints made to the Ombudsman’s Office, how the effectiveness of the programme for the re-integration and recovery of child soldiers had been evaluated, whether legal mechanisms for extra-territorial jurisdictions and extradition were in place, and whether the Government had conducted human rights awareness-raising activities to combat the recruitment of children into armed groups.

Concerning the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, Committee Experts asked whether the Government had considered criminalizing the sale of children, why the 800 plus cases that had been brought before the Attorney General’s Office had not included any cases on the sale of children, whether private adoption homes were still legal, to what extent the population was aware of the contents of the Optional Protocol, and what measures had been taken to protect children involved in recovery and re-integration programmes from stigmatization.

The Committee will release its formal, written concluding observations and recommendations on the reports of Colombia towards the end of its three-week session, which will conclude on Friday, 11 June 2010.

The delegation of Colombia also included representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defence, the Colombian Armed Forces, the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare, the Permanent Mission of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Geneva,
an advisor on children’s affairs, the Supreme Council for Reintegration, the Presidential Supreme Council for Social Action, and the Attorney General’s Office.

As one of the 193 States parties to the Convention, Colombia is obliged to present periodic reports to the Committee on its efforts to comply with the provisions of the treaty. The delegation was on hand today to present the report and to answer questions raised by Committee Experts.

When the Committee reconvenes in public at 5.30 p.m. on Friday, 11 June, it will make public its concluding observations on the reports considered over the past three weeks, before officially closing its fifty-fourth session.

Reports of Colombia

The initial report of Colombia under the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (CRC/C/OPSC/COL/1) notes that the entry into force of the Protocol in 2003 had given additional impetus to the application of the principles of non-discrimination, best interests of the child, right to life, survival and development, non-discrimination, and respect for the views of the child. The Government had made significant advances and had put underway a strategic Plan Against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents 2006-2011, promoted inter-institutional coordination between different entities and organizations, and conducted sensitization and training campaigns. Nevertheless, several obstacles to ensuring the enjoyment of the rights as set forth in the Optional Protocol remained, including the clandestine nature of the sale and commercial sexual exploitation of children and adolescents, social acceptance of such practices, and difficulties in collecting data on the magnitude of those phenomena. While much remained to be done, the Government trusted that the joint efforts of Colombia and this Committee would lead to improvements in safeguarding the rights of Colombian children.

The initial report of Colombia under the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict (CRC/C/OPAC/COL/1) says that the Colombian armed forces under no circumstances recruit children under the age of 18 years into their ranks, even if the parents give their consent. Before and during the entry into force of the Convention, numerous efforts were undertaken to do away with the recruitment of children into the armed forces and to prevent their recruitment by illegal armed groups. Military service is compulsory only for men aged 18 years or over and there is no legal, regulatory or constitutional provision for any exception whatsoever. For women, military service is always voluntary. In the course of the peace process conducted with now-demobilized self-defence groups, and during the period of collective demobilization, 307 minors were released from armed groups and placed under the protection of the competent State body. A further 84 children had been handed over by the self-defence groups before the demobilization process and were also incorporated into the programmes offered by the Colombian Family Welfare Institute. A significant number of the demobilized persons were between 18 and 23 years old when they laid down their arms, which leads one to believe that they joined the group when they were still minors.

Discussion on the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict

Presentation of Report

FRANK PEARL, High Counsellor for Peace to the Presidency of Colombia, introducing Colombia’s initial report under the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, said when Colombia ratified the Convention it made a reservation to article 48 which prohibited the recruitment of children under 18 into the armed forces. Nevertheless, the State party had prohibited such recruitment in 1999, even if parents of children under 18 gave their consent. In addition, a special programme had been created under the auspices of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare to support such children. In 2006 both the Children’s Law and the Adolescents’ Law were passed and in 2007 an inter-sectoral commission was created to deal with the prevention of children’s recruitment into armed groups.

Mr. Pearl went on to say that Colombia’s security forces did not use minors, but that was unfortunately not the case for non-State armed groups such as the “Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia”. The Government had been running an excellent re-integration programme for youth, who had left the ranks of armed groups, but the disarmament process was not perfect and some minors had not yet been able to leave armed groups and self-defence units. This having been said, efforts were underway to address that situation and identify individuals who wished to leave such groups and the Government would continue with this initiative until it was able to seek out those children and ensure that they enjoyed their rights.

Mr. Pearl said the Ministry of Defence had developed and disseminated at least four guidelines aimed at ensuring that minors were not used in civic-military activities. Nevertheless, much remained to be done and it was vital to ensure that there were proper consequences; in that regard, sentences had been increased for people involved in the recruitment of children under 18 and approximately 700 sentences were underway for such offences. Authorities had also made efforts to strengthen the unit of justice and peace and had in place an institutional offer, that is, programmes aimed at preventing and caring for de-mobilized individuals and denouncing the abuses they had suffered.

Mr. Pearl acknowledged that major challenges remained in spite of the progress that had been achieved. For example, the appropriateness of the content of social investment programmes must be ensured and so-called third-level programmes, which specifically targeted vulnerable populations, needed to be focused upon. It was also challenging to ensure effective coordination and effectively reach minors under the age of 18 who participated in non-State armed groups.

Questions by Experts

SUSANA VILLARAN DE LA PUENTE, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the Reports of Colombia, observed that violence, death and disappearances caused by non-State armed groups persisted in Colombia despite the progress the Government had achieved. There had been a drop in the number of extrajudicial executions, but how did the Government ensure that that would not happen again? Also, what actions had been taken by the inter-sectoral commission in terms of prevention for recruitment into such groups?

The Rapporteur then asked what had been done in terms of due diligence, what human and financial resources had been given to the Office of the Attorney General for investigating offences, and what measures had been implemented to ensure that sentences would be handed down within appropriate time-frames.

The delegation was also asked how many children had managed to leave the armed auto-defence groups, how legislation on reparations for children had been applied in practice, how that legislation was different from the 2008 law that provided for solidarity reparation, and what was part of the redress offered to children as part of the protocol?

The Committee also wanted to know how the Government of Colombia had reacted to the report of the United Nations Secretary-General on the use of children as informers.

Experts also asked about the role of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare in terms of coordination, whether statistics were available on the number and nature of complaints made to the Ombudsman’s Office, whether that office was in line with the Paris Principles, and whether it was truly independent. Also, could information be given on the status of military schools and the status of children who were enrolled therein?

The Committee then turned to the general security situation in Colombia and the Government’s attempts to challenge the vicious cycle of violence. An Expert asked what the current situation was and what activities had been conducted to improve social and human capital as well as resilience.

A Committee Expert was very impressed by the programme for the re-integration and recovery of child soldiers, but said that programme needed to be quantitatively and qualitatively improved – how did authorities plan to do this, how was the effectiveness of the programme evaluated, how independent was that evaluation mechanism, and were civil society organizations involved in that process?

Another risk factor of that programme was that many children were from a rural background and then appeared in urban settings – how was the potentially negative effect of that managed and how was secondary violence against the children, or between the children within the programme, managed by authorities?

Committee Experts asked whether there were any legal mechanisms that allowed for extra-territorial jurisdictions and extradition and whether the Optional Protocol provided a sufficient legal basis for extraditing persons who had participated in the recruitment of children for armed conflict.

The delegation was also asked for statistics on children who participated in former paramilitary organizations, whether the Government had taken concrete action to prevent such recruitment, and what protection those children enjoyed.

The Committee had been informed that recruitment of children into non-State armed groups often occurred by convincing the children rather than by force. Had the Government conducted human rights awareness-raising activities to combat this, had it conducted peace education, and what other measures had it taken in terms of prevention?

The Committee noted that young people had been taking various measures to prevent their recruitment into non-State armed groups, including pregnancy and running away from their homes, which led to internal displacement and other problems. What had the Government undertaken in that regard, and how did it strengthen the role of local authorities?

A Committee member then wanted to know how many children were of African descent or of indigenous origins, and how many orphans, or children who lost all contact with their family, were internally displaced. Also, could the delegation explain what had been done to limit and monitor the circulation, distribution and possession of arms in the country?

Response by Delegation

Responding to the question of why boys and girls joined non-State armed groups, the delegation said 85 per cent of children joined due to a lack of opportunities, or due to specific social factors, and the remaining 15 percent were recruited by force. The Government had undertaken efforts to tackle this situation from a human rights approach rather than a military strategy. Based on studies whose results suggested that many children felt unsafe at home and in their communities and therefore sought refuge in other environments where their rights were increasingly violated, a commission was established in 2007.

The delegation acknowledged that a long way remained to be covered in that regard, but said the Government had started working towards children being recognized as rights bearers before they lost enjoyment of their rights. However, that was a long-term process. Children of African descent needed to be given particular attention regarding recruitment into armed groups and specific measures were geared to their needs.

Responding to the question about who recruited boys and girls and for what purpose, the delegation explained that it was the “Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia” and the “Ejército Revolucionario del Pueblo” who mostly lived with them in rural areas. Organized crime also used children, but these organizations mostly worked in urban areas and children continued living at their homes. The Government therefore referred to them being “used” rather than “recruited”.

With regards to the work conducted by the Office of the Attorney General, the delegation said it was unable to provide information about the convictions that office had handed down or the resources given to it. Nevertheless, the delegation informed the Committee that a total of 239 cases of illegal recruitment had been reported to the two human rights units and that two cases had led to convictions in 2009. Committee Experts said it seemed that many cases had been before the courts but that very few sentences had been handed down. The delegation said children who had been part of armed groups could be enrolled in special programmes and alternative mechanisms rather than being convicted which explained the low number of sentences that had been handed down. Moreover, checking up on testimonies took time and sentences were therefore not handed down very fast.

An Expert said the Committee would appreciate information on the strategy to prevent recruitment - what substantial changes had been seen regarding children’s recruitment into armed groups and how did the delegation explain that the numbers seemed to be increasing? Responding, the delegation said the results of that strategy remained to be seen. Perhaps the impact of the strategy could be explained in Colombia’s next report to the Committee; it must not be forgotten that the issue at hand was to change culture, which was a lengthy process.

Responding to questions about summary executions, the delegation said following the many summary executions in the past the Government had established a special commission. That commission had suggested various measures which had led to the removal of top army officials as well as a drastic decrease in the number of formal complaints. Also, following his 2009 country visit to Colombia, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions said that he had seen the willingness of the Colombian Government to address the situation in terms of summary executions.

On the Government’s cooperation with United Nations agencies present in Colombia, the delegation said cooperation meant that the State could strengthen its own capacities through the help and support of United Nations agencies. The Government was open and accountable and welcomed suggestions as to how it could better meet its obligations.

Responding to an Expert’s question on the data that had allegedly been stolen from a staff member from the United Nations Children's Fund who was part of a special task force, the delegation said the Government condemned that theft. While the circumstances had not yet been entirely clarified the competent authorities continued to work on that.

Clarifying the role of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare, the delegation said that organization worked on issues related to children affected by armed conflict, ran early childhood development programmes, and helped children of African descent and of indigenous origins, among other topics.

On military academies, the delegation said those were quite isolated in the country, but traditional military colleges were duly authorized and part of Colombia’s educational system.

As far as weapon control was concerned, there was a weapons and explosives control office and weapon possession was tightly regulated. In fact, all possessors of weapons must allow examination of their criminal records, be above the age of 18, and fulfil a number of health criteria.

The delegation then turned to the Committee’s concerns about the assessment of the re-integration and recovery programme and confirmed that organizations from various sectors had been involved in that process, including the International Organization for Migration, the United Nations Children's Fund, as well as civil society organizations.

According to the delegation, the Government recognized that work needed to be done in terms of the education provided in military colleges and it was ready to review and revise its standards.

On the use of children under the age of 18 as informers, the delegation said there had not been any complaints on that, but if a non-governmental organization or citizen knew of such cases they should inform the Government.

Responding to the question on extra-territorial jurisdiction, the delegation said so far Colombia had not received any requests for extradition, but if it would receive any in the future, it would agree to extradition if the Optional Protocol served as a basis for that. In contrast, foreigners involved in crimes could be investigated. In fact, there was currently a case of a Greek citizen who was being extradited to Colombia for the offences he had conducted.

Responding to a question on round-ups, the delegation said if citizens did not volunteer for armed forces they had to go to a specific place and time to be recruited. However, the mayor or district commander of that zone was always present to ensure that no person was enlisted illegally.

Discussion on the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography

Presentation of Report

ELVIRA FORERO, Director of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare, introducing Colombia’s initial report under the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, said the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare had been acting transparently in providing quality care, prevention and protection. The Institute was also charged with the development technical guidelines and was mandated to re-establish children's rights, provide independent advice, and protect children who were at risk. In addition, there was the Attorney General’s Office that received complaints and had been handing down rulings and the national police that took investigative action and took children away from risky situations.

Turning to progress made with regards to the implementation of the Optional Protocol, Ms. Forero said a committee had been set up in 2005, in collaboration with various stakeholders, to manage standards in terms of human trafficking, and a manual for the comprehensive care of victims of trafficking had been set up. Programmes aimed at preventing trafficking had been conducted and a free national hotline had been set up. The Government had also ensured that cases of trafficking had been investigated as highlighted by the fact that the Attorney General’s Office had received 207 cases in 2009, 11 of which related to children.

As far as prostitution and child pornography were concerned, the Government had implemented three Acts that had made it possible for Colombia to comply with the provisions of the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. A very effective and innovative fund to combat sexual exploitation – towards which every tourist leaving Colombia needed to pay one dollar – had also been set up, and the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare provided shelters to victims.

Questions by Experts

SUSANA VILLARAN DE LA PUENTE, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the Reports of Colombia, asked whether the Government had considered criminalizing the sale of children and whether it had evaluated the causes and contexts under which sale of children took place.

Ms. Villaran de La Puente expressed concern that crimes remained unpunished and said impunity would mean a chronic recurrence of the crime. Why did the 800 plus cases that had been brought before the Attorney General’s Office not include any cases on the sale of children?

Other Committee Members then said many articles in Colombian laws gave interesting definitions of adoption, but did the law also include provisions to punish intermediaries involved in adoption processes that could be seen as sale of children? And were there any reports on intermediary adoptions. Committee members said the private adoption homes remained of concern, and asked whether these were still legal.

On inter-country adoptions more specifically, Experts wanted to know why Colombia had so many inter-country adoptions, what mechanisms were in place for cross-checking their legality, who was responsible for accrediting the people and organizations working in the field of inter-country adoption, and what criteria were used.

With regards to child pornography the Committee wanted to know whether the possession of pornographic material was punishable under Colombian law, and if not, whether the Government was considering including this in its legislation.

The Committee also asked to what extent the Colombian population was aware of the contents of the Optional Protocol, what action the Government had taken to ensure that that was the case, what languages had been used to disseminate the contents to indigenous people and other groups, and how officials working on the implementation of the Optional Protocol had been trained.

Another Expert said there seemed to be a problem regarding the quantity and quality of programmes for the recovery and re-integration of child victims. Could the delegation clarify what measures had been taken to protect children from stigmatization during such processes and to ensure their rights were respected, and was civil society involved in this?

The delegation was also asked to comment on the rights of children and adolescents who had been victims of sexual abuse and wished to receive medical care.

A Committee Member asked whether child victims knew where to go and what procedures to follow to access compensation, and whether that compensation – once received - did not place children in a difficult situation when they were back in their vulnerable situation; if so, what had the authorities undertaken in that regard?

Response by the Delegation

Responding to those questions and issues, the delegation said that Colombian law criminalized the production, storing and possession of child pornography.

The delegation went on to say that, although the sale of children only occurred on an exceptional basis, the Colombian Government wished to tailor its legislation to include this crime in order to plug any gaps in that area. Victims who had suffered from this crime were cared for in their families, in host families, or in institutions and - once their situation was determined – they were given back to their biological family environment whenever possible. In the 5 per cent of cases where that was not possible, the child was given free for adoption.

Following up on the sale of children, an Expert said the Committee had received many reports of forced labour, which was also a form of sale of children. The delegation agreed but said it should not be forgotten that Colombia had witnessed a sharp drop in child labour since the report had been submitted. While more needed to be done, the figures clearly showed a drop in child labour and new statistics on this would be available later in 2010.

On the topic of sexual exploitation and trafficking in children the delegation said Colombia had a national body that brought together the relevant actors and helped clamping down on sexual tourism. There was ongoing cooperation regarding detection and awareness-raising activities and effective measures had been taken when sexual abuse was detected. There were currently 27 centres that cared for victims and there would soon be another 10.

The delegation then turned to adoption. It said the Government believed that a transparent and comprehensive adoption process was important. In Colombia, adoption was free of charge but the Government had advised that the adoption costs be published on the web to make sure that people were aware of the costs that were associated to adoption. The delegation informed the Committee that the Government organized random visits to private adoption homes to make sure protocols were respected.

The delegation went on to say that 58 per cent of all adoptions were national adoptions, and only 42 per cent were international adoptions. International adoption processes were monitored closely, and international accreditation bodies needed to send registers to several Ministries. Colombia was currently also working with France and other countries to exchange good practices in terms of adoptions.

Turning to civil registration, the delegation explained that nobody needed to pay for registration and that the Government had been collaborating with various stakeholders, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, to ensure that each and every child was registered in Colombia. While 97 per cent of all Colombian children were registered authorities currently explored the possibility of mobile teams to reach people in remote areas.

A Committee Expert then asked which department of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare was responsible for overseeing the work on issues pertaining to the Optional Protocol and what budget was available. Responding, the delegation said one of the sub-departments of the Institute worked specifically on the Optional Protocol and disseminated its contents. The budget was approximately 4 million a year. That sub-directorate was located at the highest level and was approved by the Government. The Institute had been actively working with non-governmental organizations.

According to the delegation, sensitization activities for the dissemination of the Optional Protocol had engaged the police, children, adolescents, and other stakeholders. Nevertheless, the delegation agreed that the Protocol and its benefits might need to be made known even more.

The delegation informed the Committee that Colombian legislation said that minors must be cared for in terms of health care without needing to show their identity card. In addition, Colombia’s Constitutional Court had recently said that the subsidised regimes and the contributory system should not be distinct systems; both should operate at the highest standard of quality.

Asked whether the 2008 study, which had quantitatively and qualitatively examined the situation of Colombian street children in terms of sexual exploitation, had been published, the delegation confirmed that that study had in fact been published.

In terms of whether victims of child prostitution could be prosecuted, the delegation said Colombian legislation saw such children as victims and therefore did not try them even if they had been involved in prostitution.

Responding to the question on whether child victims had adequate capacities to lodge complaints, the delegation said children could denounce violation of their rights at two or three places. The delegation further said that child victims did not receive economic compensation and the reparation they received would therefore not have any negative repercussions when they moved back to their communities.

As for whether minors had been able to contribute to the design of the programmes in which they were enrolled, the delegation confirmed that that was the case and explained that they were brought in to comment on how they felt on the services through focus groups and questionnaires. However, it was challenging to build up trust without which re-victimization could happen and protection could not be achieved.

Preliminary Concluding Observations

SUSANA VILLARAN DE LA PUENTE, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the Reports of Colombia, in preliminary concluding observations, said it had been an open and fruitful dialogue and the Committee acknowledged the high-level delegation and its efforts to obtain the information that the Committee had requested. Ms. Villaran de la Puente went on to say that the Committee had heard about mechanisms and procedures, but what was also needed was the full harmonization of Colombian legislation with the two Optional Protocols so as to promote and protect children's rights. The existing institutions and the coordination between them also needed to be strengthened, the Rapporteur said, and expressed hope that Colombia would take account of the comments and observations of the Committee.

FRANK PEARL, High Counsellor for Peace to the Presidency of Colombia, thanked the Committee for the interest it had shown in Colombia. The Colombian Government had made considerable improvements but was aware that many challenges remained to be mastered.

__________

For use of the information media; not an official record