General Comments:

I.        The lack of formal platforms and structures, or spaces for children’s voices and views to be heard by State Parties.

 

While introduction of legislation and policies which places obligations on other actors to provide opportunities for children to participate may be of some use, it is more important that the State Parties ensure that platforms and mechanisms are in place for children to express their views where it is considered mandatory that these views are taken seriously.

 

Children and adolescents are critical observers of their own condition and should be participants in decisions concerning themselves and their lives. These young people need to participate in finding solutions to the problems they face. They need to relate to society in an organised way, feel adult, and yet feel the protection and security needed by children. They should be encouraged to reason independently and have the courage to dissent. A practical experience of participatory democracy (learning through doing) is essential for the moulding of the ‘new citizen’.

 

In democracies adults have the following means to represent themselves:

  • Voting for their elected representatives
  • Participating in local government through platforms like the Grama Sabhas (India)
  • Legal Action
  • Protests, rallies, petitions and other forms of political action
  • Through membership in unions and movements

 

But children are denied these avenues and lack formal spaces to represent themselves and their interests. They need to understand and prepare for governance and citizenship and therefore must be enabled to interact in a constructive and meaningful way with local governments, state, national and global level policy making bodies and be a part of the design, implementation and monitoring of such policies.

 

Organisations of children and youth should be enabled and given mandatory rights to participate in Governance. Structures that enable this participation and link organisations of children and adolescents to local governments need to be created and ensure that logical and empowering processes are mandatory towards such participation.

 

The inclusion of children’s participation in local governments will enable children to ‘learn’ through action the processes of democratic governance, and also enable adults to participate more actively; strengthening democratic processes in this country and hopefully ensure the survival of democracy.

 

However, for children’s participation to be truly productive and not just tokenistic the State should create structures for children to; first of all; access their local governments that are closest and most accessible to them. These structures should have special provision for children from the most marginalised communities to access them. A good example of this concept in practice is functioning in the State of Karnataka, India since 1996. The Makkala Panchayats or Children’s Local Governments, the Children’s Task Force and the Children’s Grama Sabhas or Children’s Village Councils. See Annexure 2.

 

In order to link the Makkala Panchayats to the Gram Panchayats, a tripartite Task Force was set up by CWC . This Task Force consists of Makkala Panchayat representatives; government officials, elected representatives and community based organisations. The Task Force also exists at sub-district, or Taluk5, level to ensure that issues raised in the Makkala Panchayats are presented at higher levels. The regular involvement of high profile government officials increases the level of bureaucratic commitment. The close interaction between children and local government bodies creates a new form of political legitimacy for children on issues regarding their own welfare. See Annexure 2.

When children begin to access political space, they are also vulnerable to threat and pressure. These may range from subtle hints going right up to physical violence. It is the responsibility of the State and the facilitating organisations to ensure that children are protected. This understanding of vulnerability also provides an impetus for us to create and find ways and means by which children can access decision making spaces without exposing themselves to threat. One such example is the ‘Children’s Post Box’.  See Annexure 3.

 

An interesting example to examine would be Mongolia that integrated structures and mechanisms for children to realise Article 12 nationally. See Annexure 1

 

 

 

                                             Back                                                                        Next>