Universal-MigrationHRlaw-PG-no-6-Publications-PractitionersGuide-2014-eng

190 | PRACTITIONERS GUIDE No. 6tion centre had a special wing for the accommodation of families, thechildren’s particular situation was not examined and the authorities didnot verify that the placement in administrative detention was a measureof last resort for which no alternative was available. The Court thus[found] that the [. . .] system did not sufficiently protect their right toliberty”. 704 In the case Yoh-Ekale Mwanje v. Belgium, the Court foundthat the detention of a woman affected by AIDS that did not presentparticular risks of flight was arbitrary because the authorities had notcontemplated the resort to less intrusive alternatives to detention, suchas a temporary residence permit. 705a) Justification of detention of childrenDetention of children raises particular considerations under the CRC, aswell as under international refugee law and international human rightslaw generally.The CRC provides in Article 37(b) that detention of a child should be onlyas a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time. Article 37should be read in light of other provisions of the CRC which affect decision-makingregarding migrant children. Of significance in all cases wheredetention of child migrants is considered is Article 3.1 CRC which requiresthat the best interests of the child should be a primary consideration inall actions concerning children. Under Article 22.1 CRC, States must takeall appropriate measures to ensure that a child refugee or asylum seekershall receive appropriate protection and humanitarian assistance, a provisionwhich could have consequences for decisions on whether to detaina child. For child migrants who accompany their parents or other adults,and who may risk imprisonment as a result, Article 2.2 CRC is relevant.It provides: “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensurethat the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishmenton the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefsof the child’s parents, legal guardians, or family members.” Similar provisionis made in Article 24 ICCPR, and Article 19 ACHR. Also of potentialsignificance is Article 39 CRC, which requires States to take measures toensure the physical and psychological recovery and social reintegrationof child victims of armed conflict, torture or inhuman or degrading treatment,neglect, exploitation or abuse.The Committee on the Rights of the Child, in General CommentNo. 6 (2005) 706 has provided guidance on the application of Article 37(b)CRC to migrant children.704 Popov v. France, ECtHR, Applications Nos. 39472/07 and 39474/07, Judgment of 19 January2012, para. 91.705 Yoh-Ekale Mwanje v. Belgium, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 412, para. 124.706 CRC, General Comment No. 6, op. cit., fn. 138, para. 61.