Children’s Participation in Holding International Peacekeepers Accountable 31
children, if CAR permits. CAR may be conciliatory in allowing such on-site UN Committee on
the Rights of the Child inquiries into SEA by international peacekeepers deployed in CAR. This
as the lack of resolution regarding these cases contributes to and reinforces the breakdown in the
rule of law and likely fosters social unrest in the region and distrust of authority generally.
In addition, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is well-equipped to do proper
follow-up on the overall security situation for peacekeeper SEA child victims in CAR. That
includes also those peacekeeper SEA child victims who advanced (in our hypothetical scenario)
an admissible CRC-OP3 complaint against the State Party (France). The UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child could conceivably also request the UN peacekeeping mission in CAR to
provide for special protection of alleged child victims of French peacekeeper SEA through the
CRC-OP3 “interim” procedures measures142 while the Committee on the Rights of the Child
inquiries are ongoing, and the complaint is being considered.
6. 2. 2 African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC)
Child victims abused and/or exploited sexually by international peacekeepers who are
nationals of a State Party to the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
(ACRWC),143 could potentially file a complaint with the body144 implementing that children’s
rights treaty (also here referred to as the ‘African Children’s Charter’). These child victims could
thus seek a remedy through this quasi-judicial process. However, the committee that implements
the African Children’s Charter - just as with the committee that oversees CRC-OP3 complaints -
has no enforcement power. There is instead reliance on the State Party to comply with the judgment
of the treaty monitoring body and provide the remedy determined by the monitoring committee to
In certain cases, the Committee implementing the ACRWC can also receive inter-State
communications from State Parties and, in some instances also non-State Parties to the African
ACERWC have both subject matter and territorial jurisdiction on communications filed
before it by either States that have not ratified the ACRWC against a state that has ratified
the ACRWC, victims or any other interested party once it could be proven that it is in the
best interest of the child (emphasis added).145
As per the rules of procedure of the committee of experts administering the ACRWC then,
CAR, which signed the African Children’s Charter April 2, 2003 but did not ratify the Charter146
(CAR thus being a non-State Party to the African Children’s Charter), could file an inter-State
142 G.A. Res. 66/138, supra note 4, at art. 6.
143 See generally OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/24.9/49, African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1990).
144 African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, INST. FOR HUM. RTS. & DEV. IN AFR.,
visited Dec. 30, 2016).
145 African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, supra note 143.
146 Ratification Table: African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, AFRICAN COMM’N ON HUM. AND
PEOPLES’ RTS., http://www.achpr.org/instruments/child/ratification (last visited May 18, 2018).