| Summary: | There are three Optional Protocols to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The first one is about children in armed conflict and the second about the Sale of children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. The third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was adopted by the UN in 2011, provides children with an international complaints mechanism to address violations on their rights. The third Optional Protocol is ratified by close to fifty states, but Sweden has neither ratified or signed the protocol - despite pressure both nationally and internationally. This means that children in Sweden doesn't have somewhere to go when they want to leave complaints when their rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child have been violated. The aim with this study was to analyze the pros and cons with a Swedish ratification of the Third Optional Protocol from a Human Rights perspective, to justify an answer if Sweden should do so or not. The analyze is an argumentation where the disadvantages first are presented, followed by the benefits, before they are set against each other. The most distinct disadvantages to a ratification is about processing times, inadmissability and the risk for manipulation. The benefits on the other hand, is about a reduced marginalization, children's increased position as right holders, the greater chance for restoration and a need for Sweden to incorporate child-sensitive complaint mechanisms on a national lever. The analyze makes clear that most of the disadvantages with a Swedish ratidfication can be responded by either counter-argument, or through the benefits which has been found due to the Human Rights perspective. The conclusion of the study is that a Swedish ratification would strengthen children's position as own actors and right holders based on the given oppertunity to make complaints in the event of a perceived violation of rights, without the consent of their guardian.
|
|---|
