Committee on the Rights of the Child considers report of Montenegro

GENEVA (18 May 2018) - The Committee on the Rights of the Child today considered the combined second and third periodic report of Montenegro on its implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Presenting the report, Kemal Purišiæ, Minister of Labour and Social Welfare of Montenegro, noted that the legislative and strategic framework for the protection of the rights of the child in the country had considerably improved during the reporting period.  The Government had set up the Council on the Rights of the Child, whose competences had been defined in cooperation with civil society.  Furthermore, the competences of the Children’s Ombudsman had been strengthened.  Montenegro had also implemented the process of deinstitutionalization of children in order to place them in foster families.  Mr. Purišiæ underlined that all children had access to health insurance, as well as to education, regardless of their status.  National legislation protected children from all forms of violence under the Strategy for the Development of Social Protection Systems and Protection of Childhood 2018-2022.  An amendment to the Criminal Code stipulated aggravated circumstances for the crime of hate against any vulnerable group, including children.  Additional changes to the Criminal Code had brought it in line with articles 2 and 3 of the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, whereas an amendment to the Family Law banned corporal punishment.  The authorities had instituted a system of data collection on social wellbeing, which would ensure the monitoring of activities in the domain and would help gather relevant statistics on the situation of children, Mr. Purišiæ concluded.

In the ensuing discussion, Committee Experts expressed concern that there was no comprehensive legislation containing all the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as the fact that there was no legislation concerning the protection of the environment and the rights of the child.  Additionally, they noted that the National Human Rights Institution has not obtained the “A” status.  Experts also raised concern about the poor quality of teaching, the lack of teacher training, and the very low school enrolment rate among Roma children.  They were seriously concerned about the practice of selective abortion, as well as indications that a large proportion of Montenegro's population felt that corporal punishment was not reprehensible.  Finally, Experts also expressed serious concern about the number of cases of violence against children and about the phenomenon of the sale of virgin girls from a minority.  They inquired why Montenegro did not have juvenile courts, nor specialists working on juvenile cases in conflict with the law.  They stressed the need to improve children's television programmes and avoid stereotyping them and requested more information on the adoption procedure.  They also requested more information about measures undertaken to combat smoking and alcohol consumption among children.

In concluding remarks, Gihad Madi, Committee Member and Rapporteur for Montenegro, expressed deep thanks and appreciation to the delegation of Montenegro for the open, transparent and constructive dialogue.   The Committee hoped that the comprehensive law on the rights of the child would be adopted very soon, as would the law on non-governmental organizations.  

Mr. Purišiæ, in concluding remarks, expressed gratitude to the Committee for the questions and kind words.  Montenegro was committed to the process of de-institutionalization and would make efforts to move the age limits.  

The delegation of Montenegro included representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, the Ministry of Human Rights and Minorities, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health, and the Permanent Mission of Montenegro to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee will next meet in public on Tuesday, 22 May at 10 p.m. to consider the initial report of the Russian Federation on its implementation of the provisions of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (CRC/C/OPSC/RUS/1).

Report

The Committee is considering the combined second and third periodic reports of Montenegro (CRC/MNE/2-3) on its implementation of the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Presentation of the Report

KEMAL PURIŠIÆ, Minister of Labour and Social Welfare of Montenegro, explained that during the period under review, the strategic and legislative framework had been considerably improved in the area of ​​children's rights.  Notably, a Council for the Rights of the Child had been established and its responsibilities had been defined with the participation of non-governmental organizations and children.  The powers of the Children’s Ombudsman had also been strengthened.  The Montenegrin authorities had continued to defend the rights of the child through awareness-raising campaigns, including through the country's various media outlets.

Montenegro had also launched a de-institutionalization process.  The country was implementing an Operational Plan for the transformation of the Bijela Children's Home, the only centre for children deprived of parental care.  The aim was to reduce the number of children in this institution and return them to their families or place them in foster families.  The existing home would be reorganized to provide support to families.  Montenegro had seen an increase in the placement of children in foster care.  Namely, there were no more children under three years of age in any institution.

The law on health care and health insurance provided for access to health insurance for all children.  All children were also entitled to access to education, regardless of their status.  This was provided for under the Asylum Act which ensured free education for all children in secondary and primary schools.  Special education had been revised to allow the implementation of an inclusive school system, added the Minister.

The legislative framework had also been revised to protect children from all forms of violence, with the adoption of the Strategy on the Development of a Social and Child Protection System 2018-2022 and its Action Plan.  The aim of this Action Plan was to provide a multidisciplinary response to violence against children.  The authorities provided care for child victims of violence, in an effort to mitigate the consequences of the violence.

An amendment to the Penal Code provided an aggravating circumstance when hate crime targeted a vulnerable group, including children.  The Montenegrin Criminal Code had also been amended to ensure compliance with articles 2 and 3 of the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.  All crimes related to torture, as well as sexual relations with children and forced marriage, had also been defined as criminal offenses.

An amendment had also been also made to the Family Law to prohibit all forms of corporal punishment of children.  Such punishment was in violation of the physical and moral integrity of the child.  This provision applied to all persons who had contact with a child. The Family Law also referred to the protection of the child in family disputes.  In this respect, the Court may appoint a person in charge of the child.  If the child was over 14 years old, his or her consent was necessary for any decision concerning then.  If it was considered that the child was not legally represented, the court had the duty to appoint a court-appointed lawyer who had received specific training to represent the children.

The 2013-2017 National Plan of Action for Children aimed to implement the well-being of children and to prepare the priorities of the new Action Plan.  Considerable improvements had been made in this regard and the political circumstances were very favourable.  The next National Action Plan would focus on improving the legislative framework.  To this effect, the proficiency of child experts would be increased and access to better services would be ensured.

A social welfare information system had been put in place, which included all available procedures and data in this area.  The system would be able to monitor activities and obtain all kinds of statistics concerning children, in particular.

Finally, Mr. Purišiæ emphasised that civil society contributed to improving the implementation of the rights of the child, including by participating in the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

Questions by the Committee Experts

BERNARD GASTAUD, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Montenegro, praised Montenegro's progress in defending and promoting the rights of the child, in particular through the adoption of numerous legislative measures.  He regretted, however, that there was no comprehensive legislation containing all the provisions of the Convention.  He asked for the details of the new Strategy on the Development of a Social and Child Protection System.

The Expert noted that the law did not define the mandate of the Children’s Ombudsman.  He also regretted that the National Human Rights Institution had not obtained the “A” status of full compliance with the Paris Principles.  Finally, he regretted that corruption had resulted in embezzlement of public funds.

Mr. Gastaud welcomed the fact that environmental protection was enshrined in the Constitution, but regretted that there was no legislation concerning the protection of the environment and the rights of the child.

He also asked what were the criteria and exceptions that authorized courts to register marriages for minors.

Mr. Gastaud was also concerned about the poor quality of teaching and the lack of teacher training, given the testimony received by the Committee.  He inquired about policies implemented to strengthen inclusive schools.

OLGA KHAZOVA, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for Montenegro, said that the country had made significant progress in the fight against discrimination against minorities.  She welcomed the access to free legal aid for all children.

On the other hand, she regretted the very low school enrolment rate among Roma children and asked what was being done to make access to education effective for all children - and in particular access for children belonging to minorities.  She inquired whether free legal services were available throughout the country and whether lawyers were specially trained to defend children.

Ms. Khazova was pleased that Montenegro had enshrined the best interests of the child in its legislation and asked whether the Convention was sufficiently disseminated in the country.

The Expert also noted an imbalance between the birth rates of boys and girls. While selective abortion was a crime in the country, in practice, this type of abortion was relatively common.  She asked if further measures would be taken against this practice.

Ms. Khazova then noted the country's progress in deinstitutionalization and asked if there was a sufficient budget to ensure the continuity of the process, including support for foster and biological families.  The Expert further requested more information on the adoption procedure.

Another Committee Expert welcomed the changes to the birth registration system, while stressing that some efforts were still needed to register abandoned and minority children. Without identity, some children could only benefit from emergency medical assistance, he said.  He also emphasised the need to improve children's television programmes and avoid stereotyping them.  There was also a need to improve access to digital media by organizing training on digital tools in schools and by encouraging the private and public sectors to participate in these programmes.  He asked whether there was a youth parliament in the country.

Another Expert regretted that a large proportion of Montenegro's population felt that corporal punishment was not reprehensible.  He then asked whether the Council for the Rights of the Child was autonomous.  He also expressed concern about the number of cases of violence against children and pointed out that in some cases child victims were sent back to their families where their abuser was.  The same Expert wanted to know more about the phenomenon of the sale of virgin girls from a minority in the country.

A Committee Expert wished to know more about the access of children with disabilities to schools.  He asked whether there were awareness raising campaigns on breastfeeding.  The Expert also inquired about the initiatives that were being taken to combat early pregnancy, and whether young people had access to contraceptive methods.  He asked what measures were being taken to combat smoking and alcohol consumption among children.

An Expert asked what measures were being undertaken to protect street children.  With regard to juvenile justice, the Expert regretted that Montenegro did not have juvenile courts, nor specialists working on juvenile cases in conflict with the law.  The Expert wished to know the number of cases concerning juveniles in conflict with the law and asked about the nature of the sanctions against them.  In particular, he inquired about the deprivation of liberty in this context.

An Expert asked for statistics on marriages with children aged between 16 and 18 years.

Replies by the Delegation

The delegation explained that civil society organizations actively participated in the work of the Council on the Rights of the Child, and recognized that the Council’s competences should be further strengthened.

As for the operational plan to transform the children’s home at Bijela, the delegation clarified that there were fewer and fewer children accommodated in that orphanage.  Montenegro aimed not to accommodate children without parental care with those children deprived of their liberty because of a conflict with law.  

An evaluation of the National Plan of Action for Children 2013-2017 had been carried out in cooperation with UNICEF.  It had been concluded that the plan had met all the expectations of the authorities because it had contributed to the creation of an environment favourable for the adoption of positive measures in the area of children’s rights.

Turning to early marriage, the delegation explained that the law allowed the possibility of marriage between the age of 16 and 18, upon the child’s request and following an analysis of the psychological and physical health of the child, and consultations with social workers, parents and guardians.  The delegation added that the Criminal Code had been amended to treat forced marriage as a crime of trafficking.  There had been no increase in the number of forced marriages in recent years, and the authorities had organized numerous training sessions on the subject for those dealing with the issue.  As for legal aid, it was available free of charge to all the children in the country.  

The Government had devised a special programme for Ashkali children to provide them with quality services in the area of education and fight against poverty.  Once per month, the authorities organized preparation sessions for Ashkali children in kindergartens and in pre-school education.  The special programme aimed at avoiding segregation of children.  Ashkali children were enrolled in schools with other children and they received free access to school transportation.

Children’s parliaments existed at schools.  Each class organized elections to appoint their representative, and children’s parliaments had a say in the organization of schools.  There was no religious education at schools; students could attend citizenship and human rights courses.

The delegation clarified that corporal punishment was prohibited by law.  The Family Law stipulated that it was forbidden in any form and in all settings.  The authorities had organized an awareness raising campaign on that subject in partnership with UNICEF.  At school, corporal punishment was forbidden and its use sanctioned, the delegation stressed.  

The maternal mortality rate had dropped considerably following the creation of counselling clinics and the implementation of awareness raising programmes in schools.  Awareness raising campaigns had been conducted across the country to fight against selective abortion.  Prenatal tests were in place to detect illnesses and to determine the sex of the child.  

The delegation said that awareness raising campaigns were conducted among Roma communities to fight violence against women and children, and to stop early marriages.  The Montenegrin authorities also financed vacation for the best Roma students.

The national human rights institution of Montenegro, namely the Ombudsman Office of Montenegro, had seen its competences and budget increase.  The Children’s Ombudsman could visit schools to directly address complaints.

There was universal birth registration for all the children born on the territory of Montenegro, the delegation said.  The registration of abandoned children was to be done by guardians.  There was no case of an abandoned child in Montenegro that was not registered.  The Montenegrin authorities had been in contact with the Kosovo authorities to find a solution for undocumented persons from Kosovo in Montenegro.  

All the professionals working in the area of child health and working with children in general had to attend training and pass examination on the rights of the child, the delegation underlined.  Several ministries maintained registers of children according to various health, education and disability criteria.  

The Social Centre was in charge of adoption procedures, and it appointed a team of experts to determine the eligibility of candidates for adoption.  Future parents were obliged to attend training on the rights of the child, which placed emphasis on the child knowing that he or she was adopted, and knowing about his or her origin.  Children’s opinion was taken into account during the adoption procedure in line with their age.  After the adoption had been granted, the Social Centre intervened only upon the request of the concerned parties.  Adopted children could access their adoption files at the age of 15.  

In Montenegro, education was mandatory between the age of 6 and 15.  Textbooks were free of charge in all primary schools.  UNICEF was currently carrying out a study on the quality of education, the results of which would be available by the end of the year.  Training for teachers was evaluated on a regular basis.  The authorities had decided to put emphasis on pre-school education because it was a basis for the development of children, the delegation explained.  

Turning to inclusive education, the delegation said that the integration of children with disabilities had become a priority.  Nevertheless, as children with disabilities required particular support, they benefited from a special programme to improve their education outcomes and acquire skills necessary for the integration in everyday life.  A team of specialists had been instituted to work with schools with a view to create an enabling environment for autistic children.  To grant greater visibility to children with disabilities, the Ministry of Minorities had published the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in an accessible format.  

Montenegro’s law against discrimination banned all forms of discrimination against persons with disabilities, and especially against children with disabilities.  The law stipulated strict sanctions in case of the breach of reasonable accommodation, and it was in full compliance with directives of the European Union.  

Children had a say in family affairs and courts had an obligation to ask for their opinion during judicial proceedings.  Nevertheless, children were not obliged to express their opinion.  Authorized experts who ensured that the best interests of the child were respected accompanied children during judicial procedures.  

There were only eight minors in detention in Montenegro, out of which seven had decided to work.  If they behaved well, juvenile offenders had the right to be “rewarded” in the form of cultural and leisure activities.  

The delegation recognized that Montenegro continued to face challenges with respect to street children.  The Ministry of the Interior had undertaken different measures to combat begging among children, namely issuing pursuits against those who sent children begging in the streets.  

The Law on Citizenship was in line with the Convention provisions concerning the fight against statelessness.  It was not possible for a person residing in Montenegro to be stateless.  If a child was born in Montenegro to unknown parents, he or she could obtain Montenegrin citizenship.  In all other cases, at least one of the child’s parents should have Montenegrin citizenship.

With respect to breastfeeding, medical authorities could recommend to mothers to breastfeed, but without exercising any pressure.  It was up to the mother to decide whether and how long to breastfeed.  

Concluding Remarks

GIHAD MADI, Committee Member and Rapporteur for Montenegro, expressed deep thanks and appreciation to the delegation of Montenegro for the open, transparent and constructive dialogue.  Sometimes they had had some miscommunication due to different languages, but at the end of the day, the Committee had received the right and correct answers to most of their questions.  The Committee hoped that the comprehensive law on the rights of the child would be adopted very soon, as well as the law on non-governmental organizations.  There was a need to focus on the two Optional Protocols and their previous concluding observations.  Montenegro, since the dialogue in 2010, had done a lot, and the Committee would like it to do more.  The Committee wished the delegation a safe journey back.

KEMAL PURIŠIÆ, Minister of Labour and Social Welfare of Montenegro, expressed gratitude to the Committee for the Experts’ questions and kind words.  He hoped the delegation had managed to answer most of the Committee’s questions, and if there was any need to send further answers in writing, the delegation was willing to do so.  Montenegro was committed to the process of de-institutionalization and would make efforts to move the age limits.  The interactive dialogue had been very useful and had opened up new views for Montenegro, which would consider all the Committee’s recommendations when it returned home.

 __________

For use of the information media; not an official record