SOUTH AFRICAN ALTERNATE REPORT COALITION Alternate Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in response to South Africa’s Combined 2nd, 3rd and 4th Periodic Country Report on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child October 2015 Page 1 of 60 This Alternate Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is a revision of the 2014 Complementary Report to the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. Organisations that participated in writing this Alternate Report and the Complementary Report: 1. Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Unit, Medical Research Council (MRC) 2. Burden of Disease Unit, MRC 3. Centre for Child Law, University of Pretoria 4. Childline South Africa 5. Children in Distress Network (CINDI) 6. Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town (UCT) 7. Community Paediatrics, University of Witwatersrand (Wits) 8. Disabled Children’s Action Group 9. Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, UCT 10. Division of Neonatal Medicine, UCT 11. Equal Education 12. Equal Education Law Centre 13. Inclusive Education South Africa 14. ISPCAN 15. Linali Consulting―Protecting Children‘s Rights 16. Molo Songololo 17. Paediatrics and Child Health, Department of Health, KwaZulu-Natal 18. Prinslean Mahery, Lecturer, School of Law, Wits 19. Resources Aimed at the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect 20. Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town 21. School of Child and Adolescent Health, UCT 22. Sonke Gender Justice 23. Women and Democracy Initiative, Dullah Omar Institute, University of the Western Cape Organisations that participated in writing the Complementary Report to the ACERWC: 1. Alcohol & Drug Abuse Research Unit, Medical Research Council 2. Activists Networking Against Child Exploitation (ANEX) 3. Arise 4. Disability Action Research Team 5. Environmental Learning Research Centre, Rhodes University 6. Health Systems Trust 7. Health Systems Research Unit, MRC 8. Homestead and Western Cape Street Children‘s Forum 9. Human Sciences Research Council 10. NACOSA 11. Open Democracy Advice Centre 12. Parliamentary Programme, Community Law Centre 13. Refugee Rights Unit, University of Cape Town 14. Save the Children South Africa 15. Section 27 16. SWOP Institute, University of Witwatersrand 17. University of the Witwatersrand 18. Yezingane Network 19. Two individual experts contributed: Janet Prest-Talbot and Lorenzo Wakefield In addition to the in-kind contributions of the organisations listed above, the preparation of this Alternate Report to the UN CROC was made possible with donor support of DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Human Development. Opinions expressed and conclusions arrived at, are those of the authors and are not necessarily to be attributed to the CoE in Human Development The preparation of the Complementary Report to the ACERWC in 2014 received donor support from Save the Children South Africa, Southern Africa Trust, DG Murray Trust and the European Union. Page 2 of 60 Alphabetical list of authors The generous contribution of their time and expertise by a wide range of academics and practitioners in the child rights arena in South Africa is gratefully acknowledged; a full list of authors for both Reports is provided below. *Authors involved in both the Reports #Authors involved only in this Alternate Report to the UN CROC 1. Alison Tilley, Open Democracy Foundation 2. *Ann Skelton, Centre for Child Law, University of Pretoria (UP) 3. Candy Day, Health Systems Trust 4. *Carina du Toit, Centre for Child Law, UP 5. *Carol Bower, Linali Consulting―Protecting Children’s Rights 6. #Catherine L Ward 7. #Cathy Matthews, Medical Research Council, Health Systems Research Unit 8. #Corey Johnson, Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town 9. *Charles Parry, Alcohol & Drug Abuse Research Unit, Medical Research Council 10. *Christina Nomdo, Resources Aimed at the Prevention Child Abuse and Neglect (RAPCAN) 11. Divya Naidoo, Save the Children South Africa 12. *Dmitri Holtzman, Equal Education Law Centre 13. #Doron Isaacs, Equal Education 14. Doreen Guara, Activists Networking Against Child Exploitation (ANEX) 15. # Dumisile Nala, Childline South Africa 16. #Haroon Salojee, Community Paediatrics, University of the Witwatersrand (Wits University) 17. Heila Lotz-Sisitka, Environmental Learning Research Centre, Rhodes University 18. Isabel Magaya, Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) 19. Janet Prest-Talbot, Independent Consultant 20. *Joan van Niekerk, ISPCAN 21. *Karabo Ozah, Centre for Child Law, UP 22. Katharine Hall, Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town (UCT) 23. #Lisa Draga, Equal Education Law Centre 24. Lorenzo Wakefield, independent researcher on children's rights 25. *Lori Lake, Children’s Institute, UCT 26. *Lucy Jamieson, Children’s Institute, UCT 27. *Marilize Ackerman, Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town 28. #Martin Struthmann Quaker Peace Centre 29. Matipa Mwamuka, Activists Networking Against Child Exploitation (ANEX) 30. Menaka Jayakody, NACOSA 31. *Michael Hendricks, School of Child and Adolescent Health, UCT 32. # Nadine Nannan, Burden of Disease Unit, Medical Research Council 33. #Natasha Rhoda, Division of Neonatal Medicine, UCT 34. *Neil H McKerrow, Paediatrics & Child Health, Department of Health, KwaZulu-Natal 35. #Patric Solomons, Molo Songololo 36. Paul Hooper, Homestead and Western Cape Street Children’s Forum 37. *Paula Proudlock, Children’s Institute, UCT 38. #Petrus de Vries, Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, UCT 39. *Prinslean Mahery, Wits University 40. Pumla Mncayi, Arise 41. #Robyn Beere, Inclusive Education South Africa 42. *Samantha Waterhouse, Women and Democracy Initiative, Dullah Omar Institute, University of the Western Cape 43. *Sandra Ambrose, Disabled Children’s Action Group 44. Sasha Stevenson, Section 27 45. Scott Burnett, LoveLife 46. #Shanaaz Mathews, Children’s Institute, UCT 47. #Stephanie Rohrs, Children’s Institute, UCT 48. Sue Philpott, Disability Action Research Team 49. #Suzanne Clulow, Children in Distress (CINDI) Network 50. Tal Schreier, Refugee Rights Unit, UCT 51. Victor Munnik, SWOP Institute, Wits University 52. #Wiedaad Slemming, Community Paediatrics, Wits University Edited by Carol Bower, Samantha Waterhouse, Lori Lake, and Vivienne Mentor-Lalu Page 3 of 60 Contributions to the content, strategic priorities and recommendations were received from people attending three workshops (24 and 25 January 2014, 09 December 2014 and 16 October 2015). For a full list of these see Annexure 2. This Alternate Report is endorsed by 42 organisations and individuals. See Annexure 1. CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 5 2 OVERARCHING STRATEGIC ISSUES ............................................................................ 5 3 GENERAL MEASURES OF IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................. 9 4 GENERAL PRINCIPLES .............................................................................................. 10 5 DEFINITION OF A CHILD .......................................................................................... 11 6 CIVIL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS .................................................................................. 13 7 VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN ................................................................................. 14 8 CHILDREN IN CONFLICT WITH THE LAW AND CHILD JUSTICE ....................................... 17 9 FAMILY ENVIRONMENT AND ALTERNATIVE CARE ......................................................... 18 10 SOCIAL SECURITY .................................................................................................. 20 11 BASIC HEALTH AND WELFARE AND DISABILITY .......................................................... 23 12 EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT (ECD) .................................................................. 31 13 EDUCATION ........................................................................................................... 31 ANNEXURES ................................................................................................................. 36 ENDNOTES .................................................................................................................. 53 This Alternate Report contains 19 989 words from the title page to page 35 Note: we use the acronym CPR to denote the South African Government’s Combined Periodic Report. Page 4 of 60 1 INTRODUCTION 1. This Alternate Report to the Government of South Africa’s (GOSA) Combined 2nd, 3rd and 4th Periodic Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CROC) has been developed by an alliance of organisations in South Africa’s children’s sector, formed in 2013 to draft alternative reports to the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child and to the CROC. The content has been developed by 52 authors representing 42 institutions and organisations. Furthermore, the content, priorities and recommendations have been influenced by three workshops of sector organisations, including key national children’s rights networks, between January 2014 and October 2015. 2. South Africa’s periodic reporting on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) has been extremely delayed, with the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Periodic Reports being submitted together. We recognise the concerted effort of the Department of Women, Children and Persons with Disability (DWCPD) to prepare and submit the report; however this does not mitigate the seriousness of the delay. Furthermore, consultation with civil society on the preparation of the Combined Periodic Report (CPR) was limited. We urge the CROC to hold South Africa accountable for the late report, establish how this will be prevented in future and seek clarity on the process by which it was developed. 3. South Africa’s child rights protection framework is relatively comprehensive. The Government of South Africa (GOSA) and civil society have invested significantly in its development since South Africa ratified the UNCRC in 1996. This includes amongst others, that the Constitution contains a section on the rights of children1; legislation such as the Children’s Act as Amended (No. 38 of 2005) [hereinafter the Children’s Act]; and Child Justice Act (No. 75 of 2008) which have entrenched the statutory protection of children’s rights. We recognise the strong practice of public participation in the development of law and policy relating to children. Further, we commend the social assistance available to poor children and families, noting the positive impact on children’s lives. Nevertheless some aspects of the framework are problematic, and the lives of the majority of children in South Africa are characterised by serious challenges. It is thus important to, at the outset, set out our views on the context of these challenges. 2 OVERARCHING STRATEGIC ISSUES 2.1 Poverty and inequality 4. The CPR claims that poverty is declining create an inaccurate impression of the situation of poverty and inequality in South Africa. Nearly 56% of children live in poverty, and 32% of all children live in households where there is no employed adult;2 43% of female-headed households do not include a single employed person.3 5. The decrease in the proportion of children living in poverty over the past decade is attributed primarily to the availability of social grants, and not declining unemployment rates, which remain unacceptably high. 6. South Africa is a deeply unequal society; despite a decrease in absolute income poverty, income inequality has increased.4 Although South Africa is a middle-income country, resources are unevenly distributed and while some children thrive, the majority face serious challenges. The country has one of the highest global Gini coefficients, at 0.68, and progress in addressing inequality has been weak.5 7. Inequality and inadequate income compromise children’s health, quality education, and access to services, and frequently leaves them in situations where their physical safety is threatened.6 In the context of our middle-income status, the high rates of malnutrition, children affected by HIV, child mortality and persistently weak performance in education are a national disgrace.7 Page 5 of 60 2.2. Leadership and coordination 8. The Ministry and DWCPD, mandated to improve monitoring and coordination of children’s rights (and the rights of women and persons with disabilities), was established in 2009 and disbanded in 2014. Its functions relating to children moved to the Department of Social Development (DSD). Civil society organisations (CSOs) were critical of the performance of the DWCPD, on the basis of its limited capacity, it was not an implementing department and had little authority over implementing departments (Basic Education, Health, Justice, Police and DSD). These problems have not been adequately addressed by moving the mandate to DSD, particularly regarding DSD’s relatively weak political authority over the range of implementing departments. 9. Overall, political leadership for realising children’s rights is extremely poor, and the policy for interdepartmental cooperation is poorly implemented. CSOs are excluded from many of these forums, and where invited, they are expected to fund their own travel, thus excluding the participation of the majority of organisations. 10. The protection of children’s rights has been strengthened by decisions of the courts, driven by civil society action. These cases are discussed throughout this Alternate Report. They include cases dealing with the best interest of the child principle; adolescent sexual autonomy rights; the rights of asylum seekers to access education; systemic failures that resulted in Foster Care Grants not being paid; the rights of child offenders; and automatic review, within 24 hours, of decisions to separate a child from his/her parents or caregivers amongst many others. 11. In line with the UN CROC General Comment 2, issued in 2002, and the 2014 Concluding Recommendations from the ACERWC to the GOSA, CSOs agree that South Africa requires an independent child’s rights monitoring body.8 The ideal form that this should take is not yet clear, some favour the creation of a Children’s Ombud, while others argue the appointment of a dedicated Children’s Rights Commissioner to the Human Rights Commission (HRC), with greater resources. This must be resolved through a consultative process with civil society. There is strong consensus that such a body must be properly capacitated and have the necessary authority. Recommendation 12. Stronger political leadership, monitoring and coordination to realise children’s rights; and establishing an independent child’s rights monitoring body with the necessary resources, capacity and authority. 13. Civil society engagement, consultation and participation in governance, implementation and monitoring processes must be routine and funded. 2.3. Corruption, lack of capacity and a lack of accountability 14. Significant failures to implement the law and policy framework are evident across the spectrum of services to children and families. The positive framework is not having the intended effect, particularly on the lives of children who are marginalised due to their poverty, race, class, disability, sexuality and nationality. These are discussed throughout this Report. High levels of corruption, lack of capacity, and absence of accountability and transparency are a significant reason for this. However, these factors result from the weak political leadership. Significantly, this lack of political will leads to weak prioritisation of expenditure and resources to realise children’s rights. 2.4. Budgeting and resourcing child services 15. Resources for child rights services should be identifiable in budgets for child protection, criminal justice, social security, health, early childhood development (ECD) and education amongst others. In addition, spending on housing, sanitation, infrastructure and many other areas is critical. Overall, the allocation of budgets to children’s rights and services is problematic. For example, the costing and allocation of child care and protection services have been continuously under-funded since 2007/08.9 16. Under-resourcing is not the only issue; provinces’ capacity to spend is a significant factor. The Financial and Fiscal Commission (FFC) reports: ‘Total unspent funds by Social Development Page 6 of 60 Departments over the four-year period (2007/2008–2010/2011) amounted to R1.2 billion.’10 The increase in allocation within child care and protection services for all provinces between 2012/13 and 2013/14 is welcome, but this increased allocation is primarily for the roll out of the Isibindi11 programme and expansion of ECD programming, which we commend. The increase obscures the fact that allocations to other social development related services are ‘near neglected’ in some provinces.12 These include funding for prevention and early intervention, the extremely under-resourced child protection services, and for child and youth care centres (CYCC).13 Similarly, increases in the education budget are welcomed; however underfunding of poor schools a serious problem and overspending on nonessential areas and underspending on essential areas at provincial level contribute to the growing inequality in the education system. 17. The FFC report indicates that departments are failing to channel the funds allocated to CSOs that are delivering child welfare and protection services. All provinces rely heavily on CSOs to deliver the majority of child social welfare services, but on average transfer less than half of their total social welfare programme budgets to CSOs to deliver these services.14 18. Increased private sector interests and outsourcing of state mandated services to business is a concern. Claims of increased efficiency must be weighed against increased inequality in services to children and contradictions between private and human rights law. Problems with this are evident in the provision of social security, education and health. Recommendation 19. GOSA must prepare and report on a national children’s budget and provincial children’s budgets. This must relate to the budgets of all government departments, not only those traditionally associated with realising children’s rights. Further, GOSA must implement Human Rights Council Resolution 17/4 regarding the guiding principles on business and human rights. 2.5 Civil society’s role and challenges 20. The political environment for South African civil society is positive, and civil society is relatively strong and independent. Emerging social movements linked to the children’s sector are further strengthening the capacity and political impact of civil society to monitor and hold government to account. CSOs deliver services. The provision of prevention, ECD, protection and support services is significantly enhanced by CSOs. In the post-apartheid era, the funding scenario is fundamentally altered; the withdrawal of international donors from funding basic service delivery and government’s reluctance to fully fund these services has placed many CSO services in a precarious position. The funding provided by government to CSO’s falls far short of the actual cost of providing quality services and is less than the government’s allocations to its own versions of those same services,15 resulting in CSOs having to cut back on their services. 21. CSOs took a case to the Free State High Court arguing that government’s subsidy for CSO service providers is unfair and unreasonable. The Court ruled in their favour and ordered government to revise its policy. After several iterations, the Court finally ruled that the government had brought its funding policy in line with the Constitution.16 In 2013 the FFC tabled a report in Parliament about the funding crisis in services for children, Parliament has not yet engaged with it.17 2.6 Inadequate data collection, monitoring and evaluation systems 22. Comparatively speaking, GOSA has significant data on children. However much of the data needed to fully understand the realities facing children are not available, partly because of lack of disaggregation, and because systems for regular effective data collection are weak. Thus the data do not serve effective planning, budgeting, monitoring or evaluation. Despite the legislation, national plans of action and strategies that mandate monitoring and evaluation, it is frequently impossible. Evidence of the failures of data collection on services to children is addressed throughout this Report. 2.7 A culture of violence 23. South Africa has high levels of interpersonal, community and sexual violence, we believe that the ‘normalisation’ of violence against children (VAC) is a matter of extreme concern. Marginalised Page 7 of 60 children (e.g. children with disabilities and children in rural areas) are even more vulnerable to violence.18 The relatively solid legal frameworks to address child protection and the criminal justice have not contributed to prevention or increased protections to children, and require urgent budget and programmatic interventions. 2.8 Marginalisation, discrimination and intersectionality 24. Social inequality is embedded; while the situation improves for some children, for others it worsens. Children who are particularly excluded, marginalised or discriminated against include: black children; children living in poverty; working class children; children with disabilities; migrant children; rural children; orphaned children; children living and working on the street; children in conflict with the law; and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) children. Intersections between these compound the discriminations against certain children. For example, a poor child with a disability, living in a rural area faces multiple layers of exclusion and discrimination and their experience is very different from a child discriminated against on the basis of disability, but living in a middle class or wealthy, urban, context. 25. Throughout the report, we refer to the manner in which these different groups are affected. However it is important to provide a dedicated overview in respect of two groups of children before integrating our analysis of the way in which they are affected throughout the report. These are children with disabilities and migrant and refugee children. 2.8.1 Children with disabilities 26. There is no single piece of legislation governing disability. Provisions for children with disabilities are scattered across a range of policies. The Integrated National Disability Strategy is intended to guide all sector-specific legislation (we note that a new policy on disability rights is currently being drafted to replace this); and the significant provisions for children with disabilities in the Children’s Act are welcomed.19 The Act states that in any matter concerning a child with a disability, consideration must be given to enabling his or her participation and providing conditions which ensure dignity, self-reliance and community involvement.20 The 2009 DSD draft Strategy for the Integration of Services to Children with Disabilities, is intended to guide the development and implementation of all government frameworks on children with disabilities, align budgets, remove barriers of access to and improve the quality of services. However, the Strategy lacks coherence and is ineffective in guiding the development of co-ordinated and comprehensive services for children with disabilities.21 27. The Disabled Children’s Action Group, a national membership organisation of parents of children with disabilities, argues that in spite of this framework, access to the full range of services for the majority of children with disabilities is compromised. They note that inter-departmental collaboration and integration of services is seldom evident and that it is essential that GOSA prioritise this. They emphasise the serious lack of services and support for children with disabilities in rural areas; they add that policies do not take a family-centred approach and thus fail to provide effective support to parents to the ultimate benefit of the child. 28. The absence of information disaggregated for children with disabilities renders them invisible and masks the disproportionate extent to which they are excluded from services. This woeful lack of data on the prevalence of disabilities in South African children and of the numbers of children accessing services from various government agencies severely impedes effective planning and budgeting to enable the full inclusion of children with disabilities in South African society. 29. The lack of access to health, ECD, education and social security rights for children with disabilities as well as the levels of violence committed against them is a serious concern. 2.8.2. Migrant children 30. African migrant children who are displaced in their countries of origin due to persecution, generalised violence or abject poverty are unquestionably a marginalised and excluded group. Refugee and asylum-seeking children, whether unaccompanied or accompanied by their parents or caregivers experience serious hardships in South Africa, primarily as a result of the poor Page 8 of 60 implementation by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) of the Refugees Act of 1998 and the lack of equal access to basic services. 31. Although the Refugees Act is progressive in theory, it fails to adequately protect children in practice. The asylum system is woefully under-capacitated, corruption is rife, and there are lengthy delays.22 Without a guardian to assist them, unaccompanied children face difficulties in making asylum claims. 32. The High Court has recently ruled that that ‘separated children’ who entered the country with asylum-seeker relatives should be included as dependents, but the DHA has lodged an application to appeal.23 Recently, DHA has closed refugee reception offices in cities like Johannesburg and Cape Town, with the intent of relocating reception facilities along the country's northern borders.24 33. Many unaccompanied migrant children in South Africa do not have an asylum claim but are economic migrants, and often children in need of care and protection. They are currently dealt with under the Children’s Act, but do not receive adequate services. They remain undocumented, but are protected from deportation if they have an order from the children’s court. Many languish in shelters until they turn 18 and then face deportation. Recommendations 34. Greater political leadership and commitment to realise the rights of children with disabilities is essential. These children have diverse needs that require an integrated approach and collaboration between the departments of health, social development, transport, police, justice and basic education. 35. GOSA should develop a single piece of legislation to specify, coordinate and govern services for children with disabilities and developmental delays. 36. The extreme marginalisation and discrimination against children with disabilities means that services to these children must be prioritised by government departments who must provide dedicated reporting on these services. 37. Increased focus on prevention and early intervention programmes in both the health and social development sectors is critical, as is a family oriented approach to services for children with disabilities. 38. International social services need to be strengthened and cross border mechanisms enhanced in order to find durable solutions for unaccompanied migrant children. 3 GENERAL MEASURES OF IMPLEMENTATION 39. Our comments relating to political leadership, failure to implement the positive legislative framework, resourcing and budgets are addressed in section 2 above. 40. South Africa has yet to sign or ratify the third Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child on Communications Procedures (2011) and the Optional Protocol on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The CPR provides no indication of the plan regarding these Optional Protocols. Furthermore, South Africa has failed to sponsor recent UN resolutions on children’s rights.25 41. South Africa finally ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), but has a reservation relating to the immediate realisation of access to education. This reservation supports the progressive realisation of the right to basic education which is in conflict with the Constitution. The unqualified nature of this right has been endorsed by the Constitutional Court in the case of Juma Musjid. 42. Our serious concern regarding South Africa’s weak track record on periodic reporting to the UNCRC is expressed in paragraph 2 of section 1 of this report. 3.1 Measures taken to realise the rights and welfare of the child Page 9 of 60 43. There is a broad range of legislation and policy in South Africa which is protective and promotive of the rights of children. However, better planning and budgeting is essential to increase the benefits of the legislation for all children in South Africa. 3.2 Measures taken to promote positive cultural values and prevent harmful practices (See section 7.7 below for an examination of harmful practice of customary traditions). 44. The Children’s Act prohibits male circumcision (except when for religious or medical reasons) and virginity testing of children under the age of 16 years, and provides that circumcision or virginity testing of children older than 16 years is performed with the child’s consent, after proper counselling and in the prescribed manner. 45. Prior to the enactment of the Children’s Act, some provinces had embarked on developing legislation aimed at regulating initiation schools and circumcision, providing a range of different standards and restrictions which differ across provinces, and from those provided for in the Children’s Act. The better regulation of initiation schools is welcomed but the number of deaths and maiming annually as a result of initiation practices is alarming and requires a stronger response from national government.26 46. The practice of ukuthwala (abduction and forced marriage)27 is relatively common, in the Eastern Cape, Mpumalanga and KwaZulu Natal. It is not expressly prohibited in law; and it is concerning that the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious, and Linguistic Communities advocates for recognising the practice when carried out on ‘consenting’ adult women.28 Recommendations 47. Provincial legislation on initiation schools and circumcision must be aligned with the Children’s Act. 48. The State must develop minimum norms and standards and a national plan of action to address illegal initiation schools and harmful initiation practices, including the successful prosecution of persons responsible for harmful and illegal initiation practices. 4 GENERAL PRINCIPLES 4.1 The best interests of the child 49. The role played by civil society in increasing the protection of children’s rights by means of litigation can be seen in developments regarding the best interests of the child principle. In its examination of the case law, the CPR has not included the internationally acclaimed developments regarding the best interest principle that have come about as a result. This positive development warrants attention. Justice Sachs’s 2008 judgement constitutes a watershed moment in constitutional litigation regarding children’s rights,29 and has set the standard for how children should be dealt with and their rights considered in all cases where children are concerned:30 50. These principles have impacted on cases in several other fields of law, including assets forfeiture,31 child offenders,32 removal of children from their parent or care-giver,33 inter-country adoption,34 education of children with disabilities,35 and treatment of child victims and witnesses36. These challenges to government by civil society have significantly informed the development of a child-centred approach in every matter concerning a child. 4.2 Respect for the views of the child 51. Participation rights are included in a number of laws affecting children, providing a strong platform to promote participation and citizenship rights. Although GOSA has argued that the annual Children’s Parliament affords children the opportunity of participating in matters which affect them. Barriers and challenges often prevent access to participation rights and gaps remain between provisions and implementation. Page 10 of 60