The Right Not to Lose Hope - Violence Against Children - East Asia ...

● THE RIGHT NOT TO LOSE HOPE64Munsch et al (2004), p.3065See footnote 5866Ancheta-Templa (2004) p.2867See footnote 28.68Bee (1992) pp.436–3769Ancheta-Templa (2004) p.2870For in-depth analysis of children’s and youth involvement ingangs and organised armed violence see Asociacion Cristiana deJovenes de Honduras (ACJ)/Save the Children UK (2002);Downey (2003); Downey (2005)71Nurick, R (2005) Trip Report to Honduras for Voices project.Save the Children UK72Johnson and Nurick (2005)73In the UK, a study of children in detention found that nearlyhalf of the children had “literacy and numeracy levels below thoseof an average 11-year-old”; more than one-quarter had “literacyand numeracy levels of seven years old […] 87 per cent hadmissed significant periods – often years – of education; 41 percent had been previously excluded from school, with 37 per centnon-attendees. None was a regular attendee.” (Social ExclusionUnit, 2002, p.157). For an important insight into children’s,parents’ and teachers’ perspectives on truancy in Bosnia andHerzegovina, see also Save the Children UK (2003a)74Richardson, J ‘Youth in Kosova/Kosovo: A situation analysis’,quoted in World Bank (2004) p.2675Berridge et al (2001) p.vi76It is important to note that whatever the circumstances oftheir exclusion from education, children who have been inconflict with the law invariably view education as totally centralto their hopes and to their future. In a consultation with childrenin the ‘Correction Centre’ (Tongi Kishore Unnayan KendraKUK) in Dhaka-Bangladesh, for example, three out of eightrecommendations by children related to the need for educationsuch as: provide effective and relevant education for all children;mainstream the education system; provide certificate from KUKvocational training to search for jobs (10 January 2005). See alsoJohnson and Nurick (2005)77Berridge et al (2001) p.2378Matthews (2001) p.6179Ateneo Human Rights Center (2004) p.5980In the USA it was estimated that over 1,000 localities hadimposed night-time curfew orders and that 76 cities had evenimposed daytime curfews (Matthews, 2001). In the UK,Section 30 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 introduced‘dispersal orders’, in effect giving the police and local authoritiesthe power to declare certain zones ‘no-go areas’ for children underthe age of 16 between the hours of 9pm and 6am, whether theyhave committed any ‘anti-social behaviour’ or not. Whileno criminal offence is required for dispersal orders to be usedagainst children, the breach of the order by the child is a criminaloffence which exposes him or her to a fine or even a term ofimprisonment up to three months. These collective restrictionshave been recently challenged in the UK courts in the case of a14-year-old who pointed out that these measures, in effect,penalise all children and would imply that they all are potentialsources of anti-social behaviours. Case of W [2005] ECWA Civ1586. It is interesting to note that the legislation uses provisionsrelating to child protection to authorise the removal of a childfrom the streets without any of the required determination thatthe child is indeed facing any risk. The Court found that thepolice were not authorised to use force to remove a child orreturn a child home when found in the dispersal area withinthe curfew period81Matthews (2001) p.6182See Howard League (5 April 2005) Abolish ASBOs for Childrenhttp://www.howardleague.org/press/2005/050405.htm83Save the Children UK (2003a) p.1584“…if a child’s role model is some tycoon who made his moneyyesterday, we really have to think about this. Subconsciously,children understand that nothing that is done in a straightmanner can give results in this system.” Mother of a primaryschool student quoted in Save the Children UK (2003a)85Matthews (2001) p.5086Hine (2004) p.4028