ERA Forum (2013) 14:543–556 DOI 10.1007/s12027-013-0320-1 A RT I C L E

The way forward: the implementation of the EU Agenda for the rights of the child Margaret Tuite

Published online: 13 November 2013 © ERA 2013

Abstract The pursuit of the implementation of child-friendly justice in the EU conforms to the core values of the European Union. This article provides an overview of EU activities on child-friendly justice and points to a need to focus on implementation aspects: on the collection of data to underpin, measure and monitor implementation at regular intervals, and on the value and benefits of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary cooperation and coordination, including training. Keywords Child friendly justice · Child participation · Right to be heard

1 EU objective on the rights of the child The promotion and protection of the rights of the child is an objective of the EU as set out in Article 3.3 of the Treaty on European Union.1 The rights of the child are also enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,2 where Article 24 of the Charter recognises that children are independent and autonomous holders of rights and reflects Article 12 of the UN Convention on the rights of the child (UNCRC) with regard to the child’s right to be heard on matters which concern them, in accordance with their age and maturity. Article 24 of the Charter also makes

1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0013:0045:EN:PDF. 2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:083:0389:0403:en:PDF.

This article is based on a presentation given at the conference Child-friendly justice organised by ERA in cooperation with the Law Society of Northern Ireland on 7–8 March 2013 in Belfast.

B)

M. Tuite, Commission Coordinator for the Rights of the Child ( DG JUSTICE, European Commission, Brussels, Belgium e-mail: [email protected]

544

M. Tuite

the child’s best interests a primary consideration for public authorities and private institutions. In that context, the European Commission adopted the EU Agenda for the rights of the child3 in February 2011, reaffirming the strong commitment of all EU institutions and all EU Member States to promote, protect and fulfil the rights of the child in all relevant EU policies. The EU Agenda recalls that the standards and principles of the UN Convention on the rights of the child must continue to guide EU policies and actions that have an impact on the rights of the child. Under general principles, the EU Agenda underlined that the EU’s commitment to the rights of the child requires a coherent approach across all relevant EU actions using the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the UN Convention on the rights of the child as a common basis for all EU action relevant to children. Furthermore, the “child rights perspective” must be taken into account in all EU measures affecting children. In the conclusion of the EU Agenda, the Commission called on the EU institutions and on the Member States to renew their commitment to step up efforts to protect and promote the rights of the child. The action of the EU should be exemplary in ensuring the respect of the provisions of the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and of the UN Convention on the rights of the child with regard to the rights of children and the EU Agenda affirmed that the Commission will continue to play its part in joint efforts to achieve the well-being and safety of all children. A renewed commitment of all actors is necessary to bring to life the vision of a world where children can be children and can safely live, play, learn, develop their full potential, and make the most of all existing opportunities. The EU Agenda focuses on a number of concrete priorities where the EU can bring real added value such as child-friendly justice and the protection of children in vulnerable situations.

2 The EU Agenda activities in the area of child-friendly justice The EU Agenda prioritised efforts to make the justice system more child-friendly in Europe, in light of the fact that the EU has competences to turn the rights of the child into reality by means of EU legislation. Children may become involved with justice systems in a number of ways, as a suspect/accused, victim, witness, party, plaintiff or subject of proceedings and when the justice system is not adapted to the specific needs of children, children can be subject to manifold restrictions or violations of their rights. Apart from criminal law contacts, children may come into contact with civil or administrative justice when their parents divorce and disagree over custody, when they are taken into care, when they appeal administrative decisions in the area of migration and asylum or education (for example exclusion from school). Children can face obstacles with regard to legal representation or in being heard by judges. Information for children and their representatives is often inadequate. Effective access to justice and participation in administrative and court proceedings are basic requirements to ensure a high level of protection of children’s legal interests 3 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/eu-agenda/index_en.htm.

The EU Agenda for the rights of the child

545

and with these requirements in mind, European Commission pursues activities along three main strands: data collection, legislative measures and non-legislative measures. • data collection • legislative measures • non-legislative measures The EU Agenda also included a commitment to promote the use of the Council of Europe Guidelines of 17 November 2010 on child-friendly justice,4 and to take them into account when proposing legal instruments in the field of civil and criminal justice. In order to promote their use, in 2012 the European Commission undertook to translate them into most official languages of the EU. 2.1 Data collection to support evidence-based policymaking: study on children’s involvement in criminal, civil and administrative judicial proceedings in the EU There is a lack of reliable, comparable and official data regarding children in general and children in judicial proceedings in particular. This data gap impedes the development and implementation of evidence-based policies and this has long been recognised as a challenge. Various data collection efforts are underway, under different policy area. Thanks to a European Parliament pilot project allocating extra financial credits, the Commission has been able to take some first steps to collect data in the justice area, by launching a study on 1 September 2012 to collect data in the 28 Member States of the EU on children’s involvement in criminal, civil and administrative judicial proceedings. As the scope of the study is judicial proceedings, and in view of the fact that juvenile justice should focus on the rehabilitation and reintegration of child offenders, a decision was taken to somewhat limit the focus on post-trial detention and to limit data collection to police custody and pre-trial detention. The impact of the justice system on the children of imprisoned parents is excluded from the scope of this study, although an estimated 800.0005 children are affected by parental imprisonment in the EU, as the study focuses on children in direct contact (and having a recognised role in proceedings) with the justice system. Nevertheless, we should not forget about this group of vulnerable children whose lives are affected by the justice system. Paragraph 28 of the UN Committee on the rights of the child General Comment No 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration refers specifically to this vulnerable group of children.6 Efforts to improve adaptations to the justice system for children in direct contact with it can be expected to have a positive impact on children of imprisoned parents (e.g. police who have been trained to work with children will respond differently to arrest situations where a child is present, etc.) even if more concerted efforts are needed to mitigate negative impacts on this group. 4 http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/childjustice/publicationsavailable_en.asp. 5 COPING study Children of prisoners: interventions and mitigations to strengthen mental health, 2013

www.eurochips.org. 6 http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/comments.htm.

546

M. Tuite

2.1.1 Study deliverables Study outputs will include A contextual narrative overview for each Member State for each strand of justice, describing the legislation and policy governing children’s involvement in judicial proceedings as at 1 June 2012. The overview for the criminal justice strand provides information differentiated by the child’s role (victim–suspect / accused–witness) and also covers horizontal aspects (e.g. national structures, training, multidisciplinary cooperation and coordination). These documents (30–60 pages each give a unique insight into legal and policy provisions for children’s involvement in justice. The original aim of the overviews was to facilitate interpretation of data collected in the course of the study so that, for instance, a reader consulting data on the number of children charged with a crime can correctly interpret the data in the light of the differing rules on the minimum age of the criminal responsibility (MACR). The overviews are informative in their own right as stand-alone documents in that they cover childfriendly justice before, during and after criminal proceedings, for all roles and shine a spotlight on key safeguards. For the civil and administrative overviews that are now underway, the work is more complex given the overlaps and links between the two systems and the fact that even less data is gathered for statistical purposes than for criminal judicial proceedings. An EU summary contextual overview for each of the three strands, including appropriate summary and comparative tables. The EU summaries aim to condense the main findings from the national reports and will provide a horizontal analysis in place by role of the child (i.e. which gaps recur for each individual role across the various safeguards and themes and whether any gaps are common for all roles across several themes). Master lists of structural, process and outcome indicators drawn up for each of the three strands, including traceability to international and EU standards and law, based on the OHCHR framework for human rights indicators.7 The indicators were drawn up prior to data collection. Outcome indicators concern outcomes for or effects on children, exclusively, and they are typically harder to populate. Many of these outcome indicators are ’aspirational’ in nature and may need surveys to be conducted, for example when we look at whether children understood their rights and the information provided to them. Below you can find one example of indicators drawn up in the area of training. (i) Structural indicator: legal obligation to provide multidisciplinary training (as part of capacity building programme) to all professionals who work for and with children on the rights and needs of children of different age groups as well as on proceedings that are adapted to them 7 Human rights indicators: a guide to measurement and implementation, UN, 2012. http://www.ohchr.org/

Documents/Publications/Human_rights_indicators_en.pdf.

The EU Agenda for the rights of the child

547

(ii) Process indicator: existence of initial training programme for all professionals who work for and with children involved in criminal proceedings (iii) Outcome indicator: Percentage of child (suspected) offenders who have had contact with trained professionals at all stages of the proceedings Comparative data for all 28 Member States As this study will not collect any new data, but rather gathers data already collected or available in Member States, there is very little data that is comparable across 28 Member States. For criminal justice, given the extensive scope and the fact that we are covering children in three different roles (suspect/offender, victim, witness), we drew up quite a number of indicators for criminal justice alone. Out of the 290 indicators, we have two fully populated indicators, 172 indicators that are partly populated, 94 indicators for which there is no data, 17 indicators with only approximate data and a further five indicators that contain very limited data. As we are dealing with different systems, definitions, reference periods, age groups and procedures, we expected gaps, and the fact that 172 indicators are partly populated is very positive. The fact that data collection takes place in some Member States may encourage others to expand their data collection scope to better measure the involvement of children. This study can serve as a benchmark against which future efforts can be measured. For the three roles of children in criminal justice, the bulk of the available data concerns suspects/offenders, there is less data on victims and for witnesses there is no comparable data whatsoever. In a limited number of cases where the provision of data was subject to payment, we excluded that data also. Relevant data for all 28 Member States Where data is not comparable, but is relevant to the study, it is also collected and made available. All data and information gathered in the course of the study will be made publically available. One of the aims of the study was to identify gaps, with a view to bridging these gaps in the future. For civil and administrative justice, there is one master list of indicators and data collection will be done in parallel for both strands, given the frequent overlaps between the two justice systems. The study aims to ensure that children’s involvement in judicial proceedings is covered in full, irrespective of where that involvement takes place. 2.1.2 Timing for the study As at August 2013, data collection for civil and criminal justice are underway; the deliverables for the criminal justice phase are being fine-tuned and finalised and should be online by November 2013. Overall results and the databases and contextual overviews for civil and administrative justice are due by 31 August 2014. 2.1.3 Cooperation with stakeholders on data collection Further to the commitment given in the EU Agenda to promote the use of the Council of Europe Guidelines, the templates developed for the contextual overviews were based on the Guidelines. Given the complexity of this study, the Commission is assisted by a steering group of experts that meets every two months. Steering group

548

M. Tuite

participants include the Council of Europe, UNICEF TransmonEE database experts, UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union, child rights experts, and a few Member State representatives). Bilateral consultations with various Member State authorities are essential and three round table meetings with all Member States (Ministries of Justice and National Statistics Offices or equivalent) have been planned as well (the first round table took place on 1 February 2013). 2.1.4 Expected results of the study As well as providing a unique insight EU wide, the study will gather available data from 2008–2011 and make it available. Furthermore, it will help to pinpoint data gaps. The results can be used to support policy-making and implementation at national and EU level and also to explore with Member States the possibilities for better data collection on children in the future. 2.1.5 Primary data collection by the Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union (FRA) In parallel and in close cooperation with the Commission study that focuses on secondary data collection, the FRA is conducting primary research among 500 judicial and other practitioners, via interviews and focus groups, of the impact of legislation and policy on child victims and witnesses in 10 Member States (BG, EE, FI, FR, DE, HR, PL, RO, ES, and UK).8 The research will identify what is or is not implemented and how, assess impact, good practice, difficulties and gaps, use of the Council of Europe Guidelines and child-friendly procedures, etc. The results will help to populate some of the outcome indicators developed in the Commission study. In 2013 and in 2014, the FRA will interview children about their experiences with the justice system in the same 10 Member States. 2.2 Legislation I would like to highlight three recent proposals/directives where the Guidelines on child-friendly justice were used in their development. These recent examples come from criminal law, but the full list of EU acquis including all the civil justice instruments are available in the acquis compilation mentioned below. The Guidelines did not seek to establish any new rules or laws, but built on the existing principles set out in international law and standards as well as case law. When compared, say, with legislation adopted 10 years ago, the EU institutions and Member States are much more attuned to the international standards on the rights of the child and recent legislation clearly reflects the standards set out in the UN Convention on the rights of the child. See Directive 2011/93/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography and recent 8 http://fra.europa.eu/en/project/2012/children-and-justice.

The EU Agenda for the rights of the child

549

improvements for children to EU asylum legislation, as well as the 2012 directive on victims’ rights,9 where child rights language features much more prominently. 2.2.1 Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA10 This directive includes several provisions on children, including Article 1.2 (best interests of the child and child-sensitive approach), Article 10 (right to be heard), Article 21 (right to protection of privacy), Article 22.4 (individual assessment of victims to identify specific protection needs), Article 23 (right to protection of victims with specific protection needs during criminal proceedings), Article 24 (right to protection of child victims during criminal proceedings). 2.2.2 Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to communicate upon arrest11 See in particular Article 5 on the right to have a third person informed of deprivation of liberty. The question of mandatory defence was also discussed during negotiations. 2.2.3 Proposal on procedural safeguards for child suspects/accused Towards the end of 2013, the Commission will make a proposal on procedural safeguards for child suspects/accused. Other recent relevant legislative measures include: 2.2.4 Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings12 This directive does not contain any specific separate provisions for children but applies to child suspects/accused during criminal proceedings and proceedings for execution of a European Arrest Warrant. Article 2 states that Member States shall ensure that suspected or accused persons who do not speak or understand the language of the criminal proceedings concerned are provided, without delay, with interpretation during criminal proceedings before investigative and judicial authorities, including during police questioning, all court hearings and any necessary interim hearings. 9 All of these documents are referenced in the compilation of EU acquis and policy documents on the rights

of the child. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/eu_acquis_2013_en.pdf. 10 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:315:0057:0073:EN:PDF. 11 Latest version of the agreed text prior to lawyer linguist revision which is now underway. The final

version will be agreed by September, voted on in European Parliament plenary and should be published in the Official Journal in October/November. http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/13/st10/st10190. en13.pdf. 12 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:280:0001:0007:en:PDF.

550

M. Tuite

2.2.5 Directive 2011/99/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the European protection order13 Recital 15 and Article 7 address child suspects of a European protection order (needs of particularly vulnerable victims such as children). 2.2.6 Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings14 According to Recital 26, when providing suspects or accused persons with information in accordance with this directive, competent authorities should pay particular attention to persons who cannot understand the content or meaning of the information, for example because of their youth or their mental or physical condition. Article 3.2 provides that Member States shall ensure that the information provided for under paragraph 1 shall be given orally or in writing, in simple and accessible language, taking into account any particular needs of vulnerable suspects or vulnerable accused persons. 2.3 Examples of non-legislative EU action 2.3.1 Measures included in the EU strategy on trafficking The EU Strategy for the eradication of trafficking in human beings includes plans for a good practice model for guardians and also for EU guidelines on child protection systems. Both the good practice model and the guidelines will be relevant for other groups of children, as well as child victims of trafficking, given that the aim is to take a systems-based integrated approach and to ensure that child protection systems are robust enough to cater to the needs of all children, rather than requiring children to adapt to the services and structures available. 2.3.2 Work done by The European Asylum Support Office (EASO) EASO’s mission is to organise and coordinate operational cooperation and to provide support in the area of asylum. EASO contributes to the development of a common European asylum system by facilitating, coordinating and strengthening practical cooperation among Member States as an independent centre of expertise. As part of its permanent support activities, EASO has developed training modules on interviewing children in asylum procedures and can also provide special, tailormade support, for example in the area of capacity building and information and analysis support.15 13 OJ L 338/2, 21 December 2011: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:

338:0002:0018:EN:PDF. 14 OJ L 142/1, 1 June 2012: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:142:0001:

0010:EN:PDF. 15 http://easo.europa.eu/support-expertise/training-quality/;

http://easo.europa.eu/wp-content/uploads/ 20052013EAC-Trainer-courses-2013_FINALJuly2013_for-the-WEB.pdf.

The EU Agenda for the rights of the child

551

2.3.3 Commission study on child participation (UNCRC Article 12) In November 2012, the Commission started a study to map legislation, policy and practice on implementation of the child’s right to be heard in EU28, across a wide variety of settings, including justice. Implementation of Article 12 UNCRC is often perceived as a challenge and the study will look at key enablers and barriers. It will also showcase good practice in all Member States and map resources and material, with a view to grouping these and making them accessible across the EU and thereby promoting broader implementation of the child’s right to be heard. The study includes a child-led research strand in five Member States. As the discourse moves from if a child should be heard to how a child should be heard, the results should be of use EU-wide. 2.3.4 Commission study to collect data on missing children The Commission has also carried out a study to collect data on missing children in EU27, including on reasons for their disappearance and on follow up action to their cases. About 250.000 children go missing every year in the EU. The results of the study will be published in October 2013. 2.3.5 EU funding in 2013—calls for proposals The EU Agenda committed to supporting and encouraging the development of training activities for judges and other professionals at European level regarding the optimal participation of children in judicial systems. The ideal would be to ensure that appropriate training is embedded in other judicial training courses, as well, of course, as being better integrated in legal practitioner academic studies and ensuring that during a judicial or legal practitioner’s career there are opportunities to upgrade knowledge and skills. The results to date of our data collection study highlight widespread gaps in training in the area of child-friendly justice; on the rights of the child and on child development and psychology and communicating with children. We also see disparities in the provision of mandatory, initial and continuous training. We see some good examples of the effective use of training, e.g. in ensuring that all children’s judges participate in mandatory training, etc. While child-friendly justice training was a priority in 2012, there was not much take up. In 2013, the Fundamental rights and citizenship programme16 has funding priorities on rights of the child, and we expect more interest in the funding possibilities given broader dissemination and more awareness of the value of justice systems adapted to children. The call for proposals will be published in late 2013, and the priorities included in the Annual Work Programme17 are replicated below. We are seeking projects that develop and deliver multidisciplinary training, based on the relevant international and EU standards, to a broad range of professionals working with and for children in judicial proceedings. 16 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants/programmes/fundamental-citizenship/index_en.htm. 17 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/files/frc_awp_2013_en.pdf.

552

M. Tuite

Priority will be given to projects that focus on or explicitly include a majority of children from vulnerable groups. All projects should not only develop a sound methodology using recognized existing good practice or tried and tested intervention models, but also consist of a large proportion of concrete and practical delivery to the specific target groups identified. Within this context the following actions will be considered for funding: • Training for practitioners/professionals dealing with children in residential care or detention on the rights of the child and on how to communicate with the children in an age- and context-appropriate manner. • Development and delivery of training modules on child-friendly justice18 for legal and other (e.g. social and health workers, police) professionals and practitioners who interact with children in the context of judicial proceedings (civil, criminal or administrative law). Modules should be developed in order to be made available and be easily adaptable for use in all EU Member States. Modules must be piloted and adapted where necessary as a result of piloting and as part of the project. Specific focus should be on interdisciplinary training on the rights and needs of children of different age groups and on proceedings that are adapted to them in the context of implementation of Article 12 UNCRC (The right to be heard). • Modules for professionals having direct contact with children must include training on communicating with them at all ages and stages of development, and with children of particular vulnerability. • Structural improvements to the provision of general information to children on their rights, namely by piloting good practice or the further rollout of good practice in the provision of general legal/rights-related advice for children, such as by way of legal advice clinics for children or mobile legal advice units, whose work is firmly grounded in the rights contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the UN Convention on the rights of the child. Also of relevance is the DAPHNE III Programme,19 the objective of which is to prevent and fight violence against children, young people and women. In 2013,20 one of the funding priorities concerns practical projects that take a child-centred approach and benefit child victims and/or witnesses of violence in close or intimate relationships. The 2013 call for proposals21 was launched in summer 2013 with a deadline of 30 October for applications. Furthermore, both the civil justice funding programme and the criminal justice funding programme generally include training and capacity building priorities of relevance to child-friendly justice.22

18 In accordance with the 2010 Guidelines on child-friendly justice of the Council of Europe. 19 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants/programmes/daphne/index_en.htm. 20 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/files/daphne_wp_2013_en.pdf. 21 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/files/call_2013_dap_ag_en.pdf. 22 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants/programmes/index_en.htm.

The EU Agenda for the rights of the child

553

2.4 Cooperation and coordination at Commission level Child-friendly justice is not the sole responsibility of the judiciary or legal practitioners. Guaranteeing children’s rights in the context of judicial proceedings is part of a continuum to guarantee the rights of the child from birth until the age of 18. The justice system co-exists and intersects with other systems and policies. Policies must be joined up and multidisciplinary work and coordination are prerequisites. The same can be said with regard to how the Commission approaches child-friendly justice. Data collection, legislative measures and non-legislative measures such as funding are part of the equation, but account needs to be taken of the situation in Member States and the necessary links also need to be made with various other policies, such as • • • • • • •

work underway at international level social policy, e.g. the recent recommendation on investing in children migration and asylum policy crime prevention measures education including human rights and child rights education child protection systems, in particular preventive aspects enlargement policy

In order to better coordinate our work, we use several mechanisms inside our organisation and to interact with external organisations and Member States. 2.4.1 7th European Forum on the rights of the child The annual European Forum on the rights of the child brings together a broad range of stakeholders on the rights of the child and provides a platform for exchange of views and reflection on rights of the child and EU actions. The 7th European Forum on the rights of the child (November 2012)23 focused on how implementation of the EU Agenda could support national child protection systems (CPS), offering a platform for the exchange of good practice among various actors across different settings to deliver on the protection needs of children, especially those who are vulnerable. Around 200 participants attended, coming from the European institutions, Member States, Ombudspersons’ offices, international organisations, the judiciary, child protection and child welfare agencies, NGOs and academia. In five workshops, participants looked in more detail at a range of situations faced by children: the role of CPS in child-friendly justice, the role of CPS in cases relating to child custody, the role of CPS in protecting children on the move, the role of CPS in protecting children from violence and the role of CPS in protecting children with disabilities. Recurring themes from the five workshops formed the concluding remarks and all of these are of relevance to any discussion on child-friendly justice: • An integrated approach to child protection, placing children at the centre and ensuring all actors and agencies work in concert; 23 The background papers and reports are here: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/

european-forum/seventh-meeting/index_en.htm.

554

M. Tuite

• The importance of non-formal actors in child protection systems, especially families; • The provision of information to children and their parents in an accessible manner, on their rights, and also on the roles and responsibilities of those involved in their situation or case, with a view to empowering children, and promoting inclusiveness; • Facilitating and fostering child participation, especially as regards children who are most vulnerable, including those with whom alternative means of communication are necessary; • Interagency and transnational cooperation and coordination: better use of cooperation protocols and exchanges of good practice. Concerted efforts to facilitate the identification of cross-border professional counterparts; • In terms of capacity-building, the provision of targeted and multidisciplinary training to a broad range of professionals, on the rights of the child, on rights-based child protection and on communicating and working with children; • Data collection is important and requires coordination and efforts by all actors; • There should be more focus on evidence-gathering, particularly with regard to approaches or intervention models that work, and then ensuring that information is disseminated and the tried and tested models re-used; • The need for early intervention and a preventative approach; • EU funding is important in terms of testing new approaches, fostering good practice, encouraging training of professionals and encouraging child-rights based policy choices; • An EU contribution and involvement in horizontal aspects such as models on guardianship, guidelines on child protection systems, coordinated work on age assessment, exchange of good practice, etc. are of value. 2.4.2 8th European Forum on the rights of the child The 8th European Forum on the rights of the child (December 2013) will continue work on some of the topics addressed in 2012, focusing on integrated child protection systems. 2.4.3 Informal expert group on the rights of the child The Commission established a new informal expert group comprising Member State authorities on the rights of the child, which will meet once per quarter. In terms of cooperation and dialogue with stakeholders, aside from the annual European Forum on the rights of the child, the Commission seeks to continue to support Member States’ efforts by promoting exchange of best practice, cooperation and communication with and among national authorities responsible for protecting and promoting the rights of the child. Agenda items at the first two meetings included the Commission recommendation on investing in children,24 the 7th and 8th European Forum meetings on the rights of 24 Commission Recommendation C (2013)778 final of 20 February 2013: Investing in children: breaking

the cycle of disadvantage. http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=9762&langId=en.

The EU Agenda for the rights of the child

555

the child, studies on children’s involvement in judicial proceedings, missing children and child participation, Directive 2012/29/EU on victims’ rights, the future proposal for a legal instrument on special safeguards for suspected or accused children, the Brussels IIa Regulation,25 the EU anti-trafficking strategy26 and the third optional protocol to the Convention on the rights of the child on a communications procedure. 2.4.4 Interservice group on the rights of the child A Commission interservice group on the rights of the child brings together policy officers from most Commission departments to exchange information and better coordinate work. Apart from these more structured meetings, obviously we have frequent and informal contacts with colleagues on rights of the child aspects. Training on rights of the child was organised and, in coordination with the Council of Europe, a workshop on child-friendly justice targeted at staff in Directorate General Justice and Directorate General Home affairs responsible for drafting legal provisions affecting children also took place. 2.4.5 Commission coordinator for the rights of the child The role of a Commission coordinator for the rights of the child was established in 2006 to promote cooperation and coordination across all policy areas and departments.

3 Conclusion The pursuit of the implementation of child-friendly justice in the EU conforms to the core values of the European Union. There is a considerable amount of legislation and standards in place and we could usefully focus more on implementation, on the collection of data to underpin, measure and monitor implementation at regular intervals, and on the value and benefits of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary cooperation and coordination. The European Commission is committed to ensuring that justice systems are adapted to the needs of children. Using its initiative under the Treaties it has tabled important pieces of legislation in recent years that have an impact on children in judicial proceedings. Non-legislative measures (funding, guidelines, good practice models, platforms for the exchange of knowledge and experience) are valuable and 25 Council Regulation 2201/2003/EC of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition

and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation 1347/2000/EC (OJ L 338/1, 23 December 2003): http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:338:0001:0029:EN:PDF. 26 Commission communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and

Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 19 June 2012 (COM(2012)286 final) on the EU Strategy towards the eradication of trafficking in human beings 2012-2016: http://eur-lex.europa. eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0286:FIN:EN:PDF.

556

M. Tuite

allow us to address one of the biggest challenges: coordination and cooperation on common objectives. The Commission welcomes the organisation by the European Law Academy of a first seminar on child-friendly justice: guaranteeing children’s rights within the EU legal framework. The contributions and discussions pointed to the need for more of these events and more time for professionals to reflect on these matters.