Skip to content

Response to Human Rights Watch's letter on minimum-age standards with respect to child labour

As the UN considers its position on child labour, a group of academics and practitioners have engaged in open debate with Human Rights Watch over the utility of minimum age rules. This is the third letter in a series.

Published:
7555171108_044a37344e_k_920.jpg
7555171108_044a37344e_k_920.jpg

Mrprovetto ./Flickr. (CC 2.0 by-nc-nd)

Foreword

On 27 January 2016, Beyond Trafficking and Slavery published an open letter by more than 50 of the world's most senior academics and expert researchers in the area of child work and child rights. On the back of decades of research and engagement with working young people, these scholars and activists called on the UN's Committee on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) to re-think best practice for how to help and protect working young people.

In particular, they call call on the committee to avoid binding the proposed ‘General Comment on the Rights of Adolescents’ to the ILO Minimum Age Convention (No. 138) or the minimum age standards set out in that convention. Instead, the letter’s signatories urge the committee to reference ILO Convention on the Worst Forms of Child Labour (No. 182). The signatories’ support for Convention 182 in this specific instance is subject to the proviso that, prior to any application, the voices of children who will be impacted are listened to and acted upon; their rights will be respected; and that their best interests (decided in conjunction with the children themselves) will be prioritised in all cases. The letter furthermore rejects the blanket application of ILO Convention No. 182, and instead suggests that its application should be guided by careful consideration of the social, cultural, and economic circumstances within which children live and labour.