Language Switcher

Key Words Archives: Children’s rights

A.D. v. Spain, Communication No. 21/2017, 4 February 2020

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

Continue Reading

D.K.N. v. Spain, Communication No. 15/2017, 1 February 2019

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

Continue Reading

Abdullahi Elmi and Aweys Abubakar v. Malta, Applications No. 25794/13 and 28151/13, Judgment of 22 November 2016

This case concerns detention for 8 months of 2 minors, aged 16 and 17, in a centre with deplorable conditions (overcrowding, lack of light and ventilation, absence of activities and tense atmosphere) while awaiting the outcome of their asylum procedure, in particular to determine their age, which constitutes a violation of Article 3 ECHR.

Source: click here

Continue Reading

Minasian and others v. the Republic of Moldova, Application no. 26879/17

In this case the European Court of Human Rights has examined the detention of children without a legal basis when they accompany their mother in detention, the inability of children to challenge the lawfulness of their detention, the domestic courts’ failure to examine whether the children’s detention was a measure of last resort and whether detention centres areappropriate for housing families with children under Article 5 § 1, 4 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Source: official link

Continue Reading

Communications No. 55/2018 E.B on behalf of E.H. et al. v. Belgium, 24 March 2022

The CRC Committee found that the children’s detention in closed family detention centres violated the prohibition on ill-treatment (art. 37 CRC), read alone and in conjunction with the best-interests principle (art. 3 CRC). Belgium’s failure to consider alternatives to detention, including the option of allowing the families to remain in their own homes while they pursued appeals and other judicial remedies, was an element of the finding that Belgium had not taken the children’s best interests as a primary consideration.

Source of the standard:

PDF file in English

PDF file in French

PDF file in Spanish

Continue Reading