child soldiers

Finally have high speed so I can blog again.  Been just too busy these past few months to deal with dial-up after work.

Omar Khadr.  I won't discuss whether his trial was fair, and I won't write about whether or not he is guilty.  I won't even say how I feel about the young man, because none of those things are relevent to the first human rights violation committed against Khadr by the US and Canada.

He was 15 when the Americans picked him up for his part in a...shoot out, for want of a better term.  He was a child soldier.  In 2002, Canada signed the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict.  

Article 4

1. Armed groups that are distinct from the armed forces of a State should not, under any circumstances, recruit or use in hostilities persons under the age of 18 years.

2. States Parties shall take all feasible measures to prevent such recruitment and use, including the adoption of legal measures necessary to prohibit and criminalize such practices. 

So no escape clause for those who claim Khadr is not covered by the Convention because he wasn't regular army.

Article 7

1. States Parties shall cooperate in the implementation of the present Protocol, including in the prevention of any activity contrary thereto and in the rehabilitation and social reintegration of persons who are victims of acts contrary thereto, including through technical cooperation and financial assistance. Such assistance and cooperation will be undertaken in consultation with the States Parties concerned and the relevant international organizations.


2. States Parties in a position to do so shall provide such assistance through existing multilateral, bilateral or other programmes or, inter alia, through a voluntary fund established in accordance with the rules of the General Assembly. 

Which means Canada should have demanded that the US hand over Khadr, a Canadian, either to Canadian custody for transfer to a group that rehabilitates child soldiers, or seen to it that the boy was immediately transferred by the Americans to such a group. 

The Canadian government was under Chretien at the time and was fully aware of Khadr's child soldier status and of its obligation to abide by the Convention.

Canada asked the United States not to send former child soldier Omar Khadr to Guantanamo after he was captured in Afghanistan in 2002, according to a letter released Thursday.

In the document dated September 2002, Ottawa argued that the prison camp in Cuba was an "inappropriate" place for Khadr, a Canadian citizen, because he was just 15 years old at the time.

The letter notes that the U.S. and Canada have laws providing for special treatment of young suspects.   

"As such, the Government of Canada believes it would be inappropriate for Mr. Omar Khadr to be transferred to the detention facilities at the American naval base at Guantanamo Bay," the letter said.

The letter also expressed concern over "ambiguity" in early accounts of Khadr's role in the events leading up to his capture. A section that apparently describes the conflict was edited.

Yet Khadr remained incarcerated with adults at Guantanamo for over 7 more years - with Paul Martin as PM, and Bush as president.  Next, Harper not only left him there, but did all he could to keep him there while Mr. Change You Can Believe In Obama did nothing to change the fate of the child soldier.

Five leaders of two of the countries that constantly boast about how they stand up for human rights, and the rights of children in particular either turned away from this one case they were responsible for, or actively worked against the Convention.

I'm wondering about this bit (highlights mine):

Article 8

1. Each State Party shall, within two years following the entry into force of the present Protocol for that State Party, submit a report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child providing comprehensive information on the measures it has taken to implement the provisions of the Protocol, including the measures taken to implement the provisions on participation and recruitment.

2. Following the submission of the comprehensive report, each State Party shall include in the reports it submits to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, in accordance with article 44 of the Convention, any further information with respect to the implementation of the Protocol. Other States Parties to the Protocol shall submit a report every five years. 

Did Canada submit such a report?  What did it say?  More empty words?  And shouldn't Canada be called to account as stated in the Convention it signed?

3. The Committee on the Rights of the Child may request from States Parties further information relevant to the implementation of the present Protocol. 

Again - Khadr's guilt or innocence does not deny him the rights of a child soldier, nor do the particulars of his involvement in an attack.  That one point comes before all the others, but the Canadian and American governments skipped right over that, counting on its ommission to give some sort of validity to treating him as an adult combattant.

We can't simply apply Conventions, laws, rights, and treaties arbitrarily or case-by-case.  That leaves the decision in the hands of our biases and prejudices which in itself is contrary to human rights.


As I said, I won't discuss Khadr's trial, in this post, at least, but Dr. Dawg offers a terrific post on that subject.