Monitoring and reporting to enhance protection of children in situations of armed conflict

There can be no doubt that civilians, and children in particular, continue to bear the brunt of violence in situations of armed conflict. Hence, the protection of civilians agenda within humanitarian operations is absolutely central, and with it, monitoring, reporting, and fact-finding (MRF). This article deals with MRF in relation to the protection of children, with a focus on the monitoring and reporting mechanism (MRM) on children and armed conflict.

Syria is only the latest reminder of the devastating impact that conflicts have on children. A few figures can remind us what this crisis concretely means: 5.5 million children from Syria are in desperate need of humanitarian assistance, out which an estimated 4.3 million inside Syria, including in besieged and hard to reach areas, and 1.2 million in refugee hosting countries across the region, and nearly 3 million children from Syria are out of school, which means about 40 percent of all school age children. According to UNICEF estimates, since March 2013, the number of children affected by the crisis has more than doubled, the number of children displaced inside Syria has more than tripled, and the number of child refugees has more than quadrupled.¹

Moreover, thousands of children have been killed or maimed – and continue to be killed and maimed every day – as a result of the constant use of military weaponry and tactics that are disproportionate and indiscriminate. There is also ample evidence of grave violations being committed against children. This includes recruitment and use of children in hostilities; arrest, arbitrary detention, ill-treatment and torture of children; rape and other forms of sexual violence against children; attacks on schools and hospitals and denial of humanitarian access for children.²

Syria is then first and foremost a “crisis of protection.” The key underlying impediment to ensuring that even the most basic humanitarian needs of children are met are the continuous, systematic, and widespread violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL), committed with impunity by all parties to the conflict. One of the strong points made in the Report of the Secretary-General’s Internal Review Panel on the United Nations Action in Sri Lanka was that the provision of humanitarian aid while not taking measures to address grave rights violations against the civilian population (and this, obviously, includes children too), is unacceptable.

Monitoring and reporting activities – and here I am referring in particular to the specific monitoring and reporting mechanism (MRM) on children and armed conflict established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1612 (2005) – are no doubt of critical importance. They inform and trigger preventive action and programmatic response for children and help to more effectively address their specific protection needs. Second, they lead to better informed, concerted, and effective advocacy that can contribute to influencing actions and changing behaviors of parties who commit violations against children. Last, but not least, they foster greater accountability. The MRM is thus undoubtedly an important tool to enhance protection of children in situations of armed conflict. As put by one senior UN official: “The MRM is not so much about making a point, but about making a difference. We need to link the MRM with the underlying response, presenting the MRM not so much as a blame and shame mechanism but as a tool to help people move into a better situation [emphasis added].”³ This applies also to the Syrian crisis where the MRM is being implemented by the UN since early 2013.

As mentioned above, monitoring and reporting activities on grave violations committed against children – first and foremost within the MRM framework – are a central element of the humanitarian (child) protection response in Syria. The information collected through the MRM provides, or at least has the potential to provide, a strong framework for advocacy at all levels and for constructive engagement with parties to the conflict and wider audiences, including those external actors who in turn can exert influence over parties to the conflict, to address grave violations against children. It also supports programming efforts, thus offering an opportunity to link monitoring to response, which is a central element of the whole MRM system. Lastly, the MRM provides an important opportunity to lay the foundation for wider and longer-term accountability and justice efforts. Given the scale of atrocities being committed against children in Syria, this last element should not be underestimated, and that potential should be fully utilized by all relevant actors and through all possible channels. Accountability is not negotiable.

Some of the most recent and significant developments in the broad field of MRF in situations of armed conflicts and internal disturbances were highlighted in an article by Rob Grace.⁴ I would like to flag here some of the developments and challenges ahead related to monitoring and reporting activities that focus specifically on grave violations committed against children in situations of armed conflict, including those implemented within the MRM framework. Three publications are particularly useful to appreciate both the impact and the complexity of MRM activities (although not recent, the publications are still relevant): the 2012 Good Practice Study,⁵ the 2008 report by the Humanitarian Practice Network,⁶ and the 2008 report by Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict⁷. More recently, the Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict developed a new resource pack on civil society engagement in the UN-led MRM, including a comprehensive array of tools and resources to support NGOs’ decision-making and engagement on the mechanism.⁸

In terms of challenges and limitations, the overarching ones mentioned in Rob Grace’s article, such as those related to protection of witnesses and victims, risk mitigation and due diligence policies, standards of proof, and quality control, also apply to children-focused monitoring and reporting processes and mechanisms. There are, however, more specific challenges related to the MRM that are worth highlighting here within the context of the broader MRF debate.

First, a common critique among practitioners is that the data collected for the MRM is sometimes under-utilized and does not sufficiently inform and trigger programming and advocacy response, especially at the local level, which means that opportunities to increase protection of children are often missed. The same critique applies to the work of the Security Council Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict (SCWG/CAAC, whose “tool kit for action” is also often seen as under-utilized, including, for instance, the possibility to forward to the Security Council sanction committees and relevant justice mechanisms information on individuals committing grave violations against children in order to contribute to ending impunity of violators.

Second, it has been noted that analyses of trends regarding grave violations committed against children are at times limited as they are based on the usually relatively small numbers of individual cases/ incidents documented, which means that there is a risk to miss “the big picture.” Instructive from this perspective are some of the observations made by the Secretary-General’s Internal Review Panel on the United Nations Action in Sri Lanka.

Third, with the increasing recourse to MRF by different international actors in response to armed conflicts and other situations of violence, there is a risk of generating information and data that is not consistent, something that can compromise the credibility of monitoring and reporting efforts. Syria is again a case in point with information on grave violations committed against children being collected through the MRM (feeding into the Secretary-General’s annual report on children and armed conflict, among others), the independent international commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab republic, and, more recently, through the monthly reports submitted by the Secretary-General to the Security Council pursuant to para. 17 of Security Council Resolution 2139 (2014).⁹ The possible contradictions in data and information between the various reporting streams must be given due attention in order to minimize the risk of inconsistencies and the potential loss of credibility.

MRF, whatever the institutional framework, is inevitably a very sensitive “political” undertaking, including when it focuses on grave violations committed against children. So, beyond the technicalities, how to collect data, how to verify it, how to ensure consistency and credibility, etc., which can always be addressed, what will ultimately make a lasting difference in the lives of millions of children in situations of armed conflict is the “political” will, commitment, and braveness to uphold our “responsibility to protect.” The extensive, real-time availability of data and information on violations committed against civilians in armed conflicts makes that responsibility even more difficult to avoid    .

About the author

The author is a PHAP member and a Senior Protection Expert working on the Syrian crisis.

Notes

¹ UNICEF (March 2014), Under Siege: The devastating impact on children of three years of conflict in Syria.
² See, in particular, the latest report of the independent international commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic (12 February 2014), A/HRC/25/65, section III (G); and the report of the Secretary-General on children and armed conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic, S/2014/31 of 27 January 2014.
³ Quoted in UNICEF, OSRSG CAAC & DPKO (December 2012), Global Good Practices Study – Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism (MRM) on Grave Violations Against Children in situations of Armed Conflict.
4 Rob Grace (11 February 2014), ”Monitoring, Reporting, and Fact-finding: Challenges and opportunities,” International Association of Professionals in Humanitarian Assistance and Protection (PHAP).
5 UNICEF, OSRSG CAAC & DPKO (December 2012), Global Good Practices Study: Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism (MRM) on Grave Violations Against Children in situations of Armed Conflict.
6 Barnett, Katy & Anna Jefferys (September 2008), Full of promise: How the UN’s Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism can better protect children, Humanitarian Practice Network.
7 Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict (January 2008), Getting it Done and Doing It Right: A Global Study on the United Nations-led Monitoring & Reporting Mechanism on Children and Armed Conflict.
8 Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, “Resource Pack for Non-Governmental Organizations.”
9 See in particular section III of the March report (24 March 2014), S/2014/208.