In this case the applicant maintained that the State failed to respect his right to be presumed to be a minor in the event of doubt or uncertainty and thus acted against his best interests and in violation of article 3 of the Convention, putting him at risk of suffering irreparable harm as a consequence of his having been placed in a detention centre for adults and ordering to return to his country of origin. The author also claimed to be a victim of a violation of his rights under Articles 18 (2), 20 (1), 12, 27 and 29. The Committee found a violation of articles 3, 8, 12 and 20 (1) of the Convention and recommended that the State party: a) ensures that all procedures for assessing the age of young people claiming to be children are carried out in a manner consistent with the Convention particularly regarding the considerations of the documents submitted and the legal representation of young people without delay and free of charge, b) ensures that unaccompanied young people claiming to be children are assigned a competent guardian as soon as possible, c) develops an effective and accessible redress mechanisms that allows young unaccompanied migrants to apply for a review of any decrees declaring them to be adults, and d) provides training to authorities, judges, and other relevant professionals on the rights of migrant children.

Source: PDF

In this case, the applicant claims that the failure of the State to recognize the validity of the original copies of his official identity documents and his refusal to undergo unnecessary tests to assess his age led to the wrong consideration of him being an adult, which left him without State protection in violation of the principle of the best interests of the child and Article 3 of the Convention as well as Articles 18 (2), 20 (1), 8, 12, 27 and 29. The Committee found a violation of articles 3, 8, 12 and 20 (1) of the Convention and recommended that the State party: a) ensures that all procedures for assessing the age of young people claiming to be children are carried out in a manner consistent with the Convention particularly regarding the considerations of the documents submitted and the legal representation of young people without delay and free of charge, b) ensures that unaccompanied young people claiming to be children are assigned a competent guardian as soon as possible, c) develops an effective and accessible redress mechanisms that allows young unaccompanied migrants to apply for a review of any decrees declaring them to be adults, and d) provides training to authorities, judges, and other relevant professionals on the rights of migrant children.

Source: PDF

This case concerns a citizen of Ghana who arrived in Spain in an irregular manner in 2016 stating that he is a minor and presenting a Ghanaian birth certificate. The Spanish authorities deemed this document to be invalid and ordered that the applicant undergo medical testing to assess his age. On the basis of the medical test results, the applicant had been found to be over 18 years old and a removal order was issued against him. The applicant maintained that during the procedure his right to be heard under Article 12 of the Convention was violated, a claim that was not found to be sufficiently substantiated by the Committee, as through objective evidence it was observed that the assessment of his age and the decision taken occurred after a lawyer was assigned to him and at the time of the forensic medical examination he was accompanied by a teacher from the child protection centre where he was housed.

Source: PDF