UNCRC - Revision history

The Admins at 04:48, 23 September 2021

2021-09-23T04:48:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:48, 23 September 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC)~~[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm]~~ is a convention agreed upon by the [[United Nations]] (Signed on 20 November 1989), that aims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).		The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC) is a convention agreed upon by the [[United Nations]] (Signed on 20 November 1989), that aims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).

	==Commentary==		==Commentary==
Line 24:		Line 24:

	:''Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."''		:''Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."''

			==External links==

			[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child Wikipedia] - The full detail.

	[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]] [[Category:Child Advocacy]][[Category:Youth]][[Category:History & Events]][[Category:History & Events: 1980s]][[Category:History & Events: 1990s]][[Category:Publications & Documents]][[Category:Pubs: Political Movement]]		[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]] [[Category:Child Advocacy]][[Category:Youth]][[Category:History & Events]][[Category:History & Events: 1980s]][[Category:History & Events: 1990s]][[Category:Publications & Documents]][[Category:Pubs: Political Movement]]

Tyciol at 00:01, 7 April 2010

2010-04-07T00:01:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:01, 7 April 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Commentary==		==Commentary==

	'''[[Strato]]''':		'''[[Strato]]''':

Line 21:		Line 20:
	:''Article 37 (Torture and Deprivation of Liberty)''		:''Article 37 (Torture and Deprivation of Liberty)''

	:''Apparently such provisions were 'in conflict' with Malaysian law and custom. They stated that "the government sees such reservations as necessary to protect the best interest of the Malaysian children. Furthermore, to apply freedom of religion to the practices of children is extremely dangerous and against the teachings of Islam."		:''Apparently such provisions were 'in conflict' with Malaysian law and custom. They stated that "the government sees such reservations as necessary to protect the best interest of the Malaysian children. Furthermore, to apply freedom of religion to the practices of children is extremely dangerous and against the teachings of [[Islam]]."
	''		''

The Admins: italicise

2009-06-20T13:07:33Z

italicise

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:07, 20 June 2009
Line 3:		Line 3:
	==Commentary==		==Commentary==

	'''Strato''':		'''[[Strato]]''':

	:"The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.		:"''The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.''

	:Hence, for example, the governing principle behind all the 'rights' it (purports to) enumerate is 'the best interests of the child'. Who determines what is in a "child's best interests"? The CRC 'reaffirms' that 'the family is the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well being of all its members - and particularly children' (Preamble); that 'parents or legal guardians have the primary responsibility for promoting children's development and well being' and that States parties should 'respect the primacy of parents, mothers and fathers' (Arts. 18.1 and 27.2).		:''Hence, for example, the governing principle behind all the 'rights' it (purports to) enumerate is 'the best interests of the child'. Who determines what is in a "child's best interests"? The CRC 'reaffirms' that 'the family is the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well being of all its members - and particularly children' (Preamble); that 'parents or legal guardians have the primary responsibility for promoting children's development and well being' and that States parties should 'respect the primacy of parents, mothers and fathers' (Arts. 18.1 and 27.2).''

	:In other words, it reinforces the State's most effective cell of control: the nuclear family.		:''In other words, it reinforces the State's most effective cell of control: the nuclear family.''

	:Further, all the 'rights' are qualified (e.g. the 'right to expression' is qualified by the need to give "due weight" to "the age and maturity of the child" (Art. 12.1) - which effectively means that parents get to decide whether their property (their children) are entitled to free expression; the 'right to education' becomes "primary education should be made compulsory" (Art 28); and the ubiquitous and overarching qualification that 'children' have rights subject to 'the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morals' - i.e. the rights are not 'rights' at all, but gestures that a State can grant or remove depending on convenience.		:''Further, all the 'rights' are qualified (e.g. the 'right to expression' is qualified by the need to give "due weight" to "the age and maturity of the child" (Art. 12.1) - which effectively means that parents get to decide whether their property (their children) are entitled to free expression; the 'right to education' becomes "primary education should be made compulsory" (Art 28); and the ubiquitous and overarching qualification that 'children' have rights subject to 'the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morals' - i.e. the rights are not 'rights' at all, but gestures that a State can grant or remove depending on convenience.''

	:In any event, like all international treaties, the sting is in the implementation - it's down to national states to give effect to the provisions. Hence the Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated that the CRC requires an end to corporal punishment - yet of the almost 200 States that are party to the CRC, less than 20 have implemented relevant national laws, and others (including most recently the UK) deliberately enshrined in national law the right of parents to use corporal punishment. Additionally, States may adopt 'reservations' to the treaty - provisions that they refuse to accept. Thus Malaysia, for instance, somehow managed to ratify the treaty, while excusing themselves from (among others):		:I''n any event, like all international treaties, the sting is in the implementation - it's down to national states to give effect to the provisions. Hence the Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated that the CRC requires an end to corporal punishment - yet of the almost 200 States that are party to the CRC, less than 20 have implemented relevant national laws, and others (including most recently the UK) deliberately enshrined in national law the right of parents to use corporal punishment. Additionally, States may adopt 'reservations' to the treaty - provisions that they refuse to accept. Thus Malaysia, for instance, somehow managed to ratify the treaty, while excusing themselves from (among others):''

	:Article 1 (Definition of a child)		:''Article 1 (Definition of a child)''
	:Article 13 (Freedom of Expression)		:''Article 13 (Freedom of Expression)''
	:Article 14 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion)		:''Article 14 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion)''
	:Article 15 (Freedom of association)		:''Article 15 (Freedom of association)''
	:Article 37 (Torture and Deprivation of Liberty)		:''Article 37 (Torture and Deprivation of Liberty)''

	:Apparently such provisions were 'in conflict' with Malaysian law and custom. They stated that "the government sees such reservations as necessary to protect the best interest of the Malaysian children. Furthermore, to apply freedom of religion to the practices of children is extremely dangerous and against the teachings of Islam."		:''Apparently such provisions were 'in conflict' with Malaysian law and custom. They stated that "the government sees such reservations as necessary to protect the best interest of the Malaysian children. Furthermore, to apply freedom of religion to the practices of children is extremely dangerous and against the teachings of Islam."
			''

	:Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."		:''Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."''

	[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]] [[Category:Child Advocacy]][[Category:Youth]][[Category:History & Events]][[Category:History & Events: 1980s]][[Category:History & Events: 1990s]][[Category:Publications & Documents]][[Category:Pubs: Political Movement]]		[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]] [[Category:Child Advocacy]][[Category:Youth]][[Category:History & Events]][[Category:History & Events: 1980s]][[Category:History & Events: 1990s]][[Category:Publications & Documents]][[Category:Pubs: Political Movement]]

Rez at 19:42, 12 October 2008

2008-10-12T19:42:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:42, 12 October 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC)[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a convention agreed upon by the [[United Nations]], that aims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).		The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC)[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a convention agreed upon by the [[United Nations]] (Signed on 20 November 1989), that aims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).

	==Commentary==		==Commentary==
Line 24:		Line 24:

	:Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."		:Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."

			[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]] [[Category:Child Advocacy]][[Category:Youth]][[Category:History & Events]][[Category:History & Events: 1980s]][[Category:History & Events: 1990s]][[Category:Publications & Documents]][[Category:Pubs: Political Movement]]

Rez at 22:24, 10 October 2008

2008-10-10T22:24:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:24, 10 October 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC)[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a ~~document~~ that ~~claims~~ to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).		The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC)[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a convention agreed upon by the [[United Nations]], that aims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).

	Strato ~~wrote a short piece on why the CRC cannot be deemed a blueprint for radical change~~:		==Commentary==

			'''Strato''':

	:"The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.		:"The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.

Rez at 14:54, 8 October 2008

2008-10-08T14:54:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:54, 8 October 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The ''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC or CRC)''[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a document that claims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).		The '''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child''' (UNCRC or CRC)[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a document that claims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).

	Strato wrote a short piece on why the CRC cannot be deemed a blueprint for radical change:		Strato wrote a short piece on why the CRC cannot be deemed a blueprint for radical change:

Daniel at 20:27, 7 July 2008

2008-07-07T20:27:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:27, 7 July 2008
Line 5:		Line 5:
	:"The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.		:"The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.

	:Hence, for example, the governing principle behind all the 'rights' it (purports to) enumerate is 'the best interests of the child'. Who determines what is in a "child's best interests"? The CRC 'reaffirms' that 'the family is the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well being of all its members - and particularly children' (Preamble); that 'parents or legal guardians have the primary responsibility for promoting children's development and well being' and		:Hence, for example, the governing principle behind all the 'rights' it (purports to) enumerate is 'the best interests of the child'. Who determines what is in a "child's best interests"? The CRC 'reaffirms' that 'the family is the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well being of all its members - and particularly children' (Preamble); that 'parents or legal guardians have the primary responsibility for promoting children's development and well being' and that States parties should 'respect the primacy of parents, mothers and fathers' (Arts. 18.1 and 27.2).
	that States parties should 'respect the primacy of parents, mothers and fathers' (Arts. 18.1 and 27.2).

	:In other words, it reinforces the State's most effective cell of control: the nuclear family.		:In other words, it reinforces the State's most effective cell of control: the nuclear family.

Daniel: New page: The ''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC or CRC)''[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a document that claims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" u...

2008-07-07T20:27:24Z

New page: The ''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC or CRC)''[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a document that claims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" u...

New page

The ''UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC or CRC)''[http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm] is a document that claims to provide a basis for the human rights of "children" under eighteen. Nearly all of the modern nation states have singed the CRC - at least in part (the document is divisible).

Strato wrote a short piece on why the CRC cannot be deemed a blueprint for radical change:

:"The CRC, like all other treaties produced by nation states, is meaningless posturing, which serves only to reinforce the existing social order.

:Hence, for example, the governing principle behind all the 'rights' it (purports to) enumerate is 'the best interests of the child'. Who determines what is in a "child's best interests"? The CRC 'reaffirms' that 'the family is the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well being of all its members - and particularly children' (Preamble); that 'parents or legal guardians have the primary responsibility for promoting children's development and well being' and
that States parties should 'respect the primacy of parents, mothers and fathers' (Arts. 18.1 and 27.2).

:In other words, it reinforces the State's most effective cell of control: the nuclear family.

:Further, all the 'rights' are qualified (e.g. the 'right to expression' is qualified by the need to give "due weight" to "the age and maturity of the child" (Art. 12.1) - which effectively means that parents get to decide whether their property (their children) are entitled to free expression; the 'right to education' becomes "primary education should be made compulsory" (Art 28); and the ubiquitous and overarching qualification that 'children' have rights subject to 'the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morals' - i.e. the rights are not 'rights' at all, but gestures that a State can grant or remove depending on convenience.

:In any event, like all international treaties, the sting is in the implementation - it's down to national states to give effect to the provisions. Hence the Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated that the CRC requires an end to corporal punishment - yet of the almost 200 States that are party to the CRC, less than 20 have implemented relevant national laws, and others (including most recently the UK) deliberately enshrined in national law the right of parents to use corporal punishment. Additionally, States may adopt 'reservations' to the treaty - provisions that they refuse to accept. Thus Malaysia, for instance, somehow managed to ratify the treaty, while excusing themselves from (among others):

:Article 1 (Definition of a child)
:Article 13 (Freedom of Expression)
:Article 14 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion)
:Article 15 (Freedom of association)
:Article 37 (Torture and Deprivation of Liberty)

:Apparently such provisions were 'in conflict' with Malaysian law and custom. They stated that "the government sees such reservations as necessary to protect the best interest of the Malaysian children. Furthermore, to apply freedom of religion to the practices of children is extremely dangerous and against the teachings of Islam."

:Ultimately international and national laws will always reflect the interests of the ruling regimes...young people would/will have to revolt (by any/all means possible) against their regimes and it's governing structures (including the nuclear family)."