Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:54 am
Time: 11:54 am
Results for terrorism recruitment
1 results foundAuthor: Child Rights International Network Title: Caught in the Crossfire?: An International Survey of Anti-Terrorism Legislation and its Impact on Children Summary: As terrorism has proliferated in the last 20 years, so have States' counterterrorism strategies and the legislation that underpins them, which has introduced new surveillance measures, restrictions on behaviour, powers of detention, and hundreds of new offences carrying heavy sentences. In developing their counter-terrorism strategies, States are obliged to ensure that human rights are promoted and protected in full. Approaches that undermine human rights are not only unlawful; they are now widely understood to be counter-productive, insofar as they consolidate the social conditions in which terrorism can flourish. Nonetheless, States commonly regard human rights as an operational impediment and are allowing them to erode. No group has been more vulnerable to this than children and young people, particularly from marginalised minority groups. This report presents the findings from CRIN's research of anti-terrorism legislation in 33 countries across five continents. It shows that counterterrorism measures are leading to extensive violations of children's rights: - Children's behaviour and interests are monitored in schools and online, without their consent and sometimes without their knowledge; - Children are criminalised for association with terrorist groups, even for marginal involvement, rather than treated as victims of grooming and calculated indoctrination by recruiters; - Children can be routinely detained without charge for long periods under counter-terrorism powers in many countries; - Children convicted of offences, such as association with a terrorist group, are punished with harsh and sometimes extreme penalties; life imprisonment is not unusual, and in some countries children have been executed; - Some State military and intelligence agencies use children as spies and informants, exposing them to undue and potentially serious harm. These effects of counter-terrorism measures are unambiguously incompatible with States' human rights obligations to children. In particular, the strategies violate several specific rights of the child, including: - The right to privacy and to freedom of expression; - The right to be protected from violence and exploitation; - The right not to be used by State military and intelligence agencies; - The right not to be deprived of liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily and the right to be treated with dignity; - The right to a criminal justice system designed for the particular needs of children, and which recognises their lesser culpability by virtue of their cognitive and emotional immaturity relative to adults; - The right of a child to have their best interests treated as a primary consideration in all actions concerning them. Where apprehended children can be subject to extended detention without charge or harsh penalties after conviction, their treatment defies cardinal principles of juvenile justice established by the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other international rules and standards. In the worst cases, such punishments amount to torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Where counter-terrorism measures target one social group disproportionately, they are also likely to amount to a violation of the right to be free from discrimination. States have favoured a 'firefighting approach' to counter-terrorism, by targeting suspected terrorists but not the social conditions in which terrorism can flourish. Structural risk factors that radically increase children's vulnerability to recruitment, such as poverty, marginalisation and the stigmatisation of certain social groups - all of which are human rights violation in themselves - have been largely overlooked. A 'human rights first' approach to counter-terrorism would begin to reverse these social conditions. A human rights approach would not criminalise children for association with terrorist groups, nor incarcerate them for terrorism offences. Instead, it would recognise children's vulnerability to recruitment, supporting them to develop their own awareness of the risks. If children had been groomed and manipulated, the State would recognise their victimisation and provide rehabilitative care. Counter-terrorism authorities committed to human rights would not snoop on children, but would allow professionals charged with their care to make informed and measured decisions about any threats to their welfare. Nor should States ever imperil children by using them in the fight against suspected terrorists. No State needs to violate the human rights of its public to tackle terrorism effectively, nor is there any advantage to be gained from doing so. A State willing to sacrifice children's rights puts them in harm's way, while handing an easy victory to terrorism. Details: London, UK: The Child Rights International Network, 2018. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 20, 2019 at: https://archive.crin.org/sites/default/files/caughtinthecrossfire.pdf Year: 2018 Country: International URL: https://archive.crin.org/en/library/publications/caught-crossfire-international-survey-anti-terrorism-legislation-and-its-impact Shelf Number: 154254 Keywords: Anti-TerrorismConvention on the Rights of the ChildCounter-terorrismHuman RightsJuvenile JusticeJuvenile OffendersSurveillanceTerrorismTerrorism Recruitment |