International Treaties on children and the disabled: Department of Foreign Affairs Briefing

Meeting report

Status of Key International Treaties pertaining to Children, Youth and Persons with Disabilities: Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Briefing
Ms Louise Graham, Deputy Director: Economic, Social and Cultural Rights & Vulnerable Groups, Department of Foreign Affairs, stated that the Department had been asked to make a presentation on the status of key international treaties. She said that this could have been done very briefly, but that she thought it important to provide perspective and context to the presentation. 

Ms Graham said that South Africa was committed to the promotion and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, strengthening of the human rights mechanisms, development of human rights law and placing economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development (RTD) on a par with civil and political rights. It was also particularly focused on advancement of practical enjoyment of human rights by vulnerable groups, and improvement of quality of life through international treaties.

The ratification of international instruments would add value to South Africa as a State party, member of the United Nations and would enhance regional cooperation and support.  Additional obligations would be placed on the States to ensure improvement of the quality of life. There would be progressive realisation and development of human rights, as ratification of such treaties signalled a commitment to making protection and promotion of human rights into a reality for all.

The structure of those dealing with Human Rights issues at the DFA was set out. The interface point for all international Human Rights mechanisms would be at this level. The DFA would also monitor and analyse the international human rights environment, develop and advise on policy options, communicate government policy, advise and assist partner departments, and advance human rights globally.

The international treaties pertaining to children were set out in detail (see attached presentation)
with the dates of ratification. It was indicated that South Africa was not presently compliant with its reporting obligations in terms of the Convention of the Rights of the Child and its optional protocol.

There were no international treaties dealing with youth matters exclusively. However, the Ordinary Session of the Africa Union, on 2 July 2006, adopted an African Charter on Youth.  South Africa had indicated an intention to ratify the Charter soon. Youth issues were also often included in international treaties dealing with human rights and vulnerable groups. The African Charter defined youth as those between 15 and 35 years of age, and was clustered around the four main themes of youth participation, education and skills development, sustainable livelihoods, and health and well-being. The UN Commission for Social Development had categorised youth as a priority, especially youth employment. DFA monitored and assessed the social development aspects (including youth) of foreign policy and of South Africa’s international obligations in this regard. It coordinated other departments in the development and implementation of UN agreements.

Treaties pertaining to Persons with Disabilities were set out (see attached presentation). Ms Graham pointed out that the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities reaffirmed the universal commitment to the rights and dignity of all people, without discrimination. It noted that persons with disabilities must enjoy all human rights on an equal basis. It made provision for the promotion of the right to an adequate standard of living and social protection, including public housing, services and assistance for disability related needs and assistance with disability related expenses in case of poverty. South Africa recognised that persons with disabilities were among the most marginalised and had been excluded by a wide range of physical, legal and social barriers from achieving their full potential. It acknowledged that this Convention would ensure changes in perception and full integration of persons with disabilities into society.

The role of the Department post ratification was set out, noting that it included the provision of a foreign policy and international perspective to domestic and national role players, advice on treaty provisions and implementation requirements, monitoring of compliance and coordinating interaction. It would also provide technical advice, and contribute to compilation of country reports. It provided feedback to national role players, advised on consideration of SA candidature for Human Rights Treaty Bodies, and briefed and supported any South African candidate who was elected.

Discussion
The Chairperson stated that recently the International Parliamentary Union (IPU) resolutions had been made and asked if the DFA had a role. She also enquired as to DFA’s role and involvement with Millennium Goals and similar New Economic Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) processes.

Ms Graham replied that the DFA did have a role, but added that with regard to the IPU it was purely supportive, as parliament was the main instrument. She added that the DFA had a unit that co-ordinated NEPAD matters.

Mr A Madella (ANC) said that the although the briefing gave him a sense of where South Africa stood, he had not seen anything on the Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination, African Rights of the Child and the Optional protocol on the Prevention of Torture.

Ms Graham replied that with relation to civil and political rights she was unprepared, as DFA was asked to focus on youth and the disabled. She noted that this presentation covered only a very small part of the overall processes. The African Charter on Child Rights was on page 10 of the presentation. Ms Graham replied that the Optional Protocol on Torture was a key instrument, but beyond the scope of her brief.

Mr Madella asked what instruments were available to ensure compliance and enforcement, as well what punitive actions could be taken.

Ms Graham responded that for core treaties monitoring committees existed, however they did not operate on an individual basis. She replied that the only international body that could take binding decisions that were enforceable was the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Other bodies or committees made findings and recommendations based on those findings. In the latter case there existed a number of technical assistance options to assist in ensuring compliance. Negative measures that a committee could take included “naming and shaming” transgressors. However South Africa was not in favour of this, as there was no evidence that this worked. Instead DFA favoured pro-active engagement.

Mr Madella asked whether the Optional Protocol on Child soldiers had been signed, and for the reasons for the delay in signing of the protocols.

Ms Graham stated that the issue in the ratification of the Children in Armed Conflict Protocol was not signed due to technical issues with the Department of Defence.

Ms E Ngaleka (ANC) asked how relevant the 1922 Prevention for Traffic of Women and Children Treaty was.

Ms Graham replied that the treaty was still relevant as it was still binding, although it was not the most prominent treaty. She added that the protocol listed on page 12 of the presentation dealt with the prevention and suppression of trafficking in terms of international crime, and that this protocol superceded everything else.

Mr T Setona (ANC) stated that he had a problem accessing the material as he was visually disabled, and requested that an electronic copy should have been sent to him in advance.

Ms Graham apologised for the oversight.

Mr L Nzimande (ANC) stated that the brief given to DFA asked for an outline and the status of key international instruments, and it had covered this and their co-ordinating and facilitating role. He felt that some of the questions were not relevant to this brief and not fair on the DFA. He requested a template of due dates for reports and progress. He asked for clarity on South Africa’s declaration on conscription. He also asked about the issue of age discrepancies between the African Youth Charter and South African legislation.

Ms Graham stated that the template would not be a problem. She acknowledged the discrepancy in terms of the African Youth Charter.

Mr Setona stated that parliament needed to ensure a move away from treaties or declarations being pieces of paper and not having a real impact.

Ms Graham added that in terms of reporting, the DFA could raise issues of compliance obligations, but that it was not the national co-ordinating body, as that resided with the Presidency. She added that after 1994 many conventions were signed and that these came with enormous responsibilities. South Africa was by no means the only country lagging behind in ratifying and implementing these conventions. She commented that there were problems around the fact that the DFA was not the lead department and was limited to serving an advisory role. 

The Chairperson asked whether the DFA would assist the Office on the Status of Disabled Persons (OSDP) in reporting on the Convention on People with Disabilities. She asked whether members of parliament could sit on monitoring committees in their personal capacity, as such committees drew on the public.

Ms Graham replied that the DFA would assist the OSDP and that they had already started to do so. She noted that the Convention stipulated that international monitoring committees were composed of bodies of experts with capability. She added that individual nominations were not excluded, but that in practice those who additionally had the support of the government fared better.

Mr Madella stated that DFA had not related to civil society’s involvement in these topics.

Ms Graham replied that civil society should play a role throughout the entire process. She acknowledged the need for a national consultative process.

Mr Setona proposed that the DFA meet the Committee in a workshop.

Ms Graham agreed.

The meeting was adjourned.