   |
|
Misanet.com / IPS, 13 January - As the plan to establish a special court to prosecute war criminals in Sierra Leone gathers momentum, one fact is clear: adults who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in that African nation's brutal civil war will be put on trial. Such a view is shared by ranking members of the United Nations, the international community and human rights activists. Thus, men like Foday Sankoh, the head of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), are expected to go before this war tribunal when it begins hearings in Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone. What is unclear, however, is the sensitive issue of prosecuting child soldiers involved in Sierra Leone's nine-year conflict. And in this regard, there is an absence of consensus. Human rights and child rights activists, for instance, have expressed reservations and questioned a proposal by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan that calls for some child combatants to be tried. Such concerns by rights organisations, in fact, have come to light again in recent weeks, following a decision made in late December by the UN Security Council. In a letter to Annan on 26 December, the Council suggested that amendments be made to his original proposal, which called for a juvenile chamber to be established within the special court to hear cases against child fighters between 15 and 18 years, rather than exempting them "from appropriate judicial proceedings". The Council agreed on a two-tier approach. On the one hand, it declared that the joint UN-Sierra Leone court has the option of trying children under 18 years for crimes committed since 1996. And the decision to prosecute child combatants guilty of grave criminal offences, it noted, should be left in the hands of the prosecutor appointed for the trial. On the other hand, though, it identified a proposed truth and reconciliation commission (TRC) for Sierra Leone as an appropriate avenue for child combatants, too. A TRC, it pointed out, "would have a major role to play in the case of juvenile offenders". For Judit Arenas, the Council's emphasis on a "less formal tribunal" like the TRC is a welcome sign. It will "better serve the interest of the children than criminal proceedings previously proposed", says Arenas, the media director for the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, a London-based non-governmental organisation (NGO). Jo Becker also sees the TRC in a similar light. It is a useful "avenue for children to recount their involvement in and accept appropriate responsibility" for violations of human rights, adds Becker, advocacy director of the Children's Rights Division of the New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW). Even Alfred Ironside agrees. "We support the view that the child soldiers should go before a truth and reconciliation commission than be prosecuted, since it will be in the best interest of the child," says Ironside, a spokesman for the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF). Yet, adds Becker, the better option would be local juvenile courts in Sierra Leone, particularly those "that apply special procedures for child offenders and protect the rights guaranteed children under the Convention on the Rights of the Child". And the reasons behind such thinking are two-fold. First of all, say the rights advocates, the estimated 5,400 child combatants in the Sierra Leone conflict need to be perceived as victims, given that "many were abducted, drugged and coerced" into committing gross atrocities. Children as young as eight years old were forced into combat this way. Secondly, any attempt to hold child combatants accountable for violations during the war should underscore the need for their "rehabilitation and reintegration into their community, not punishment". Annan's proposal, they point out, sends the wrong message. According to Arenas, the threat of having to face such a judicial procedure has already resulted in "many children refusing to leave the bush and enter rehabilitation programmes". Nevertheless, both Arenas and Becker agree that the stance by rights organisations does not mean that all child combatants be excused, given that there were a number of crimes committed by them. HRW believes that children who "voluntarily committed gross atrocities must be held accountable for their activities", affirms Becker. Annan, however, has still to react to this latest development over the debate on trying child soldiers in Sierra Leone. "It still remains to be seen how the Secretary-General and the government of Sierra Leone will respond to the suggestions of the Security Council," says Illene Cohn, a programme officer in office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict. Yet, points out Cohn, the amendment suggested by the Security Council "has not in any way" removed the principles emphasised by Annan in his draft proposal for the special court to "have personal jurisdiction over persons between ages 15-18 at the time of the crime". - The Council notes the very important role to be played by the truth commission. At the same time, the Security Council has retained the principle of juvenile justice within the court's statute, stresses Cohn. According to Olara Otunnu, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, the ideas that shaped Annan's proposals were the result of extensive negotiations between the United Nations and the government of Sierra Leone. The Juvenile Justice and the Special Court for Sierra Leone, he states in a background note, offers "a credible system of justice and accountability for the very brutal crimes committed in Sierra Leone since November 1996, including egregious acts committed by persons who were at least 15 years of age at the time of the crime". What is more, he argues, the court will recognise the need to "promote rehabilitation" of child soldiers and "rejects punishment" as an objective for young offenders. - I do believe that some children and young adults who committed grave crimes as adolescents, can benefit from participation in a process that ensures accountability for one's actions (and) respects the procedural guarantees appropriate in the administration of juvenile justice, observes Otunnu.
|
