missing children memorandum to the eu

Transcription

MISSING CHILDREN
MEMORANDUM TO THE EU
Recommendations on effective
European strategies regarding the
cross-border problem of missing
children
Every two minutes, a child is reported missing
in the EU. The cause as well as the effect of the
disappearance may include situations of violence, neglect, abuse and exploitation. Missing
Children Europe’s vision is that all children
should be able to rely on effective and holistic
systems of child protection, where all measures
are taken to empower and protect them from
any situation of harm.
Missing Children Europe is the European federation for missing and sexually exploited children representing 30 organisations from 24
European countries. These organisations provide day to day support services for families
and children facing issues related to the disappearance of children.
Our mission is to contribute to the development of effective child protection systems that
prevent, protect and support children from any
kind of violence, abuse, exploitation or neglect
that is caused by or results from them going
missing.
Missing Children Europe looks forward to continuing its close cooperation with the different
institutions of the European Union, in order to
work out tangible and realistic proposals allowing to realize the recommendations outlines in this memorandum.
National borders will not stop
children from going missing
from one country to another.
They shouldn’t stop us from
helping children either.
Maud de Boer-Buquicchio,
President of Missing Children Europe
UN Special Rapporteur on the sale of
children, child prostitution and
child pornography
3. Missing children memorandum to the European Union
Overview of recommendations
A. General recommendations in view of a comprehensive
European approach on missing children
Summary of recommendations
1. Missing children and the need for a European cross-border approach
1
Collecting national data on missing children at EU level (p.6)
2
Coordinating improved responses in cross border cases of missing children (p.6)
3
Providing mid-term funding for this European coordination (p.6) 4
Promoting and supporting cooperation with non-EU countries (p.6)
5 Agreeing on international procedures for entering Article 32 Alerts in the SIS II Schengen
system database (p.7)
2. Towards integrated child protection to prevent children from going missing
6
Promoting a holistic integrated child protection approach (p.7)
7
Improving awareness and shared understanding of the problem (p.7)
3. Complementary tools for a comprehensive approach
8
Strengthening the Universal Service Directive to support the 116 000 hotlines (p.10)
9
Providing funding for 116 000 hotlines for missing children (p.10)
10
Raising awareness on the availability of 116 000 hotlines for missing children (p.10)
11
Promoting implementation of the 116 000 hotline for missing children in Finland (p.10)
12 Encouraging and funding national coordinating law enforcement bodies specialised in missing children investigations (p.11)
13
Encouraging child alert developments for worrying disappearances (p.12)
14 Facilitating cross border cooperation of child alert systems integration within the wider setting
of available tools (p.12)
B. Specific recommendations addressing vulnerabilities
related to targeted groups of missing children
Summary of recommendations
1. Runaways
1
Understanding of the problem of runaways as a social welfare and child protection issue (p.14)
2 Prioritising support services to young people in crisis and their families, with an emphasis on
prevention of runaway behavior (p.14)
Raising awareness among young people about risks of running away, alternative solutions
to running away and available help (p.15)
3
2. Parental abductions
1
Promoting the Brussels IIa Regulation (p.16)
2
Tackling administrative and legal obstacles (p.16)
3
Addressing enforcement problems of return decisions (p.16)
4
Cooperating with the EP Mediator on Parental Abductions (p.17)
5 Encouraging the development of quality standards for mediators who mediate cross-border
family disputes on an EU level (p.17)
6 Training on European Regulations for judicial professionals who work with families who face
cross-border conflicts (p.17)
7
Reaching out to non-member states to settle cross-border family disputes via mediation (p.17)
3. Missing unaccompanied migrant children
1 Implementing existing EU legislation on access to services, protection, justice and clear information (p.19)
2 Introducing infringement proceedings for the protection and reception of unaccompanied
migrant children. (p.19)
3
Prioritising developments to improve needs assessments for unaccompanied migrant children
(p.19)
4 Ensuring unaccompanied migrant children can apply for international protection in the country
where they are (p.19)
5
Negotiating a Recast Family Protection Directive (p.20)
6
Promoting a ‘life project approach’ for each unaccompanied migrant child (p.20)
7 Harmonising the standards and practices of guardians and reception centres across member
states (p.20)
8
Promoting equal treatment of all missing children (p.21)
9 Promoting cooperation between reception centres and 116 000 hotlines for missing
children (p.21)
10
Protecting children in countries of origin (p.22)
A. General recommendations in view of
a comprehensive European approach on
missing children
1. Missing children and the need for a European cross border
approach
According to a study published by the
European Commission in 2013, 250.000 children are reported missing in the EU each year.ii
A closer look at the data provided reveals that
data collection and reporting practices in the
member states do not allow for a full picture of
the problem, and that many more children are
likely to be missing than covered by the mentioned statistics.iii This lack of data hampers the
development of evidence based policies, and
has an impact on general awareness of the
problem as well as services provided across
the different member states.
While being among the great achievements
of the European Union and Schengen area,
the increase in mobility and ease of travel in
the EU also have an effect on the problem of
missing children, which has become increasingly cross-border.v A data report published by
Missing Children Europe in May 2015 on the
caseload of hotlines for missing children highlights that an overall 25% of the cases reported to a total of 27 hotlines are cross-border or
international in nature. 79% of the international or cross-border cases are considered to be
intra EU situations. 11% concern situations involving non-EU European countries, 6% relate
to situations involving North-African countries.
Data collected from a network of specialised
mediators for cross border family conflicts included in the same report, reveals that 75% of
the cases handled by these mediators concern
intra-EU situations.
A sustainable coordinated European approach is needed more than ever to address
this growing European problem.
1
2
Available national data on
missing children should be
collected at a European level
on an annual basis, based on
harmonised definitions.iv
The European institutions
should continue the promotion
and support of European
coordination to improve
responses in cross-border cases
of missing children.
3 Sustainable, mid-term European
funding should be made
available for this coordination.
Funding should be linked
to a longer term vision and
monitoring of results to avoid
fragmentation and loss of
investment.
4 The European institutions
should promote and support
cooperation and coordination
on missing children issues with
non-EU countries, at a policy and
operational level.
should strengthen cross-border
cooperation among national law
enforcement bodies in charge of
missing children investigations,
by reinforcing the use of
international procedures for
entering alerts on all categories
of missing children in the SIS
II Schengen system database.
Close cooperation should also
be established with Interpol to
strengthen the use of Yellow
Notices for missing children.
2. Towards integrated child protection to prevent children
from going missing
Child disappearance is a complex and multilayered problem encompassing a wide group
of different situations and children needing different responses to varying levels of vulnerability.i While missing children are too often identified with the rather limited category of criminal
abductions, the largest group in fact concerns
children who run away from their home or from
the institution in which they have been placed.
The second largest group concerns children
abducted by a parent following a family
break-up or divorce. A particularly vulnerable
group concerns unaccompanied (mostly) migrant children who go missing from reception
or observation centres. Other children may be
lost, injured or missing for no clear reason. The
smallest group concerns children abducted by
a third person.
The disappearance of a child is in many cases
the result of a failed system of protection. It is
embedded in a series of different factors and
events related to the individual child’s physical
and psycho-social wellbeing, family environment, sociocultural community and socio-economic context. Each of these aspects and dimensions involves different formal and informal
stakeholders concerned with different aspects
of and responsibilities regarding the problem.
Where the protective and empowering environment needed for children to feel and remain safe is lagging behind, the risk of them
slipping through the net - and going missing
- increases.
Any effective response to the disappearance
of a child must therefore take this broader
context as well as the multiplicity of actors into
account, which is why integrated child protection systems,vi are of primary importance in
addressing the problem. Many obstacles however remain at local, regional, national and
European level, including:
- a lack of shared awareness, common language and understanding of the problem
of missing children. The problem remains un(der)-defined in relevant ministerial and police
regulations.
- a lack of cooperation and coordination between different stakeholders at national level,
including between law enforcement and 116
000 hotlines for missing children in some member states.
Further investments are also needed to better
understand risk and harm related to going
missing, including links to criminality. Further research should be undertaken to analyze incidents of running away and going missing to
clearly understand what is happening individually and collectively in this particular area.
6 The EU should continue the
promotion of coordination
and cooperation in integrated
child protection systems.
The issue of missing children
should be considered
under this angle, fostering
the need for prevention,
national coordination and
complementarity between
services, in the framework of a
comprehensive successor to the
EU Agenda for the Rights of the
Child.
should contribute to improving
awareness and shared
understanding of the problem
of missing children. This
should include the promotion
of harmonised language by
defining the different main
categories of missing children,
through different (soft law)
instruments at their disposal. viii
A child rights approach: as relevant for missing
children as for any other child
Missing Children Europe welcomes the establishment of a European Parliament Intergroup on children’s rights and well-being, as a formal body in
the European Parliament to mainstream children’s
rights and assess the impact of legislative and
non-legislative work on children, in the absence of
a Parliamentary committee with an explicit responsibility for children.
Missing Children Europe also welcomes the
European Parliament resolution on the 25th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of
the Child (2014/2919(RSP)) which calls upon the
Commission to ensure that the mandate and resources of the children’s rights coordinator ade-
quately reflect the European Union’s commitment
to systematically and effectively mainstreaming children’s rights. The resolution also stresses the need
for a more coordinated approach to finding missing children in the EU; calls on the member states
to increase police and judicial cooperation in cross
border cases involving missing children and to develop hotlines to search for missing children and
support victims of child abuse.
Missing Children Europe supports the Child Rights
Manifesto prepared by 15 organisations working
towards the realisation of the European Union’s
legal and policy commitments to promote and protect children’s rights, and obligations set out in the
Convention on the Rights of the Child.
3. Complementary tools for a comprehensive approach
The complexity of the problem of missing children requires that a “toolbox“ comprising different solutions be available, to be used depending on the individual reality and needs of
the child. Without cooperation and integration
with the other elements none of the existing
tools can effectively tackle the broader problem of missing children. Tools and systems in
place for missing children should include at
least:
28 EU member statesix as well as in Albania
and Serbia and partially in Ukraine to access
24h free emotional, psychological, legal and
administrative support in the different categories of child disappearances:
> 116 000 hotline for missing children
The 116 000 telephone number was reserved
for hotlines for missing children in Europe
through EC Decision 2007/116/EC in 2007.
Today the number can be dialed in 27 of the
% of cases opened in 2014 that were found in the same year
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
90
58
53
40
Data from
17 hotlines
23
Runaways
Parental
abductions
(national &
international)
Missing
unaccompanied
migrant children
On average,
67% of all
children reported
missing in 2014
were found in
the same year
Criminal
abductions
Lost, injured
or
otherwise
missing
The 116 000 hotlines are open to adults and
children alike, and are based on a multiagency approach. They complement the investigative actions of law enforcement authorities
in the different member states, to whom they
also provide support through search actions
tailored to the circumstances and needs of
the individual case (including i.e. training &
mobilisation of volunteers, making equipment
available, disseminating images of a missing
child when the public’s help is needed to find
the child, etc.). To make sure these hotlines are
effective and able to cooperate in cross-border cases, Missing Children Europe constantly
works on developing tools and support measures. These include:
-
Quality
standards
harmonising
the
service
delivery
throughout
the
European Union, increasingly allowing
parents and children to rely on the same
quality and on the same help when
calling the number across member
states
-Procedures for
border casesx
cooperation
in
cross
-Software applications to improve the
way hotlines collect information and data
on cases of missing children
- Evaluation mechanisms to help hotlines
address
possible
weaknesses
in
their service delivery
-Common communication
posters, videos, …)
tools
(logo,
-Mutual learning opportunities
visits, online courses, …)
(study
Practical guidance for hotline operators
The 2011 Practical Guide for hotline operators developed by Missing Children Europe, with and for
116 000 hotlines, provides for basic quality criteria
related to:
A. the organisational structure of the hotline, including minimum staff requirements, suggestions
related to structure and capacity of the organisation and trainings to be delivered to employees
and volunteers
B. operational management, including suggestions related to system and data storage, availability, accessibility and visibility of the service and
the 116 000 number.
The guide also provides for a number of tools related to call taking attitudes for operators, a testimony report template and a model of agreement for cooperation with law enforcement.
The European Commission study on missing
children of 2013 highlighted that “116 000
hotlines are a precious source of data about
the circumstances and profile of missing children, beyond the level of data that can be
easily obtained from police databases.” It also
stressed the potential of 116 000 hotlines in
playing a “prominent role in championing preventative and follow-up work that extends beyond the remit of individual police forces as
well as in raising awareness and sharing information.” The study finally emphasized how
116 000 hotlines provide “a channel whereby
cases of disappearance can be reported and
handled by professionally trained operators.”
EU funding provided through the Daphne
Programmexi, combined with policy measures
and political support has led to further implementation, improvement of service quality. A
200% increase of the calls made to the 116
000 hotlines increasingly available across
Europe has been noted since 2012:
Categories of missing children (new cases opened
by hotlines)
10%
Runaways
Parental
abductions
Missing unaccompanied
migrant children
Criminal abductions
Lost, injured orotherwise
missing children
1%
1%
37%
51%
Data from 26 hotlines
Number of calls received on
the 116 000 hotlines
268,309
300,000
250,012
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
89,340
34,572
2011
2012
2013
2014
Data from 26 hotlines
Despite these developments, efforts of member
states in realising the ‘same number – same
service’ approach behind the number vary.
Article 27a of the Universal Service Directivexii
covering ‘Harmonised numbers for harmonised
services of social value, including the missing
children hotline number’ states that member
states must “in addition to measures of general
applicability to all numbers in the “116”, make
every effort to ensure that citizens have access
to a service operating a hotline to report cases
of missing children.” The lack of support from
the government (17%), opposition from the
government (4%) and lack of financial resources (26%) were among challenges raised by
the hotlines for 2014.xiii
While awareness on the number is increasing,
further efforts are needed for parents and children in need to find immediate support when
facing a disappearance.
These 116 000 hotlines are furthermore bound
to face increasing challenges, as funding provided by the European Commission Daphne
Programme in 2012, 2013 & 2014 will end
after 2015. In a survey conducted in 2014 by
Missing Children Europe, 56% of the responding hotlines qualified the availability of EC funding as ‘essential’ in terms of impact on the issue
of missing children in their country (‘Essential’:
without EC funding the issue of missing children
would not / no longer be addressed) and 50%
said EC funding was ‘very important’ (‘Very important’: EC funding contributes greatly to ongoing efforts).
8
9
should strengthen the
language of Art. 27a of the
Universal Service Directive
to make sure that Member
States’ authorities provide
the necessary support
to enable the national
116 000 hotline for
missing children to be fully
functional.
should continue providing
financial support to 116
000 hotlines if increased
support is not provided
at national level. Funding
should be subject to
clear expectations and
demonstrable results in
terms of the service quality
provided.
10 The European
institutions should
support awareness on
the availability of 116
000 hotlines for missing
children and support
awareness raising
initiatives at national
level through funding
and other measures.
11 The European
institutions should
continue promoting the
implementation of 116
000 in Finland, the only
EU member state where
the hotline has not yet
been assigned to an
organisation.
> Trained law enforcement
authorities
Efficient policing is an essential element in the
global approach to missing children, in particular for those cases where the life of the child
may be at risk.
Yet, law enforcement bodies in most member
states often remain poorly resourced, understaffed and in some cases untrained to provide immediate responses to missing children
notifications at national level. Furthermore cooperation between national law enforcement
agencies in cross-border cases remains too
slow and ineffective.
12 The European
institutions should
encourage member
states to set up and
adequately fund
national coordinating
law enforcement bodies
specialised in missing
children investigations,
to train and support
local agencies,
collect national law
enforcement data
on missing children
and work with other
stakeholders including
116 000 hotlines for
missing children.xv
An effective policing model for missing children
The Belgian Federal Police Unit for Missing
Persons provides coordination, support and expertise to local police forces in missing persons
cases in Belgium. The Unit works closely with
Child Focus, the Belgian Foundation for Missing
and Sexually Exploited Children, which runs the
Belgian 116 000 hotline for missing children.
> Child alert and
dissemination systems
In a limited number of extremely worrying cases of child disappearances, national agencies
mandated to deal with missing children may
need to alert the general public of these cases,
to be able to get information on the potential whereabouts of the child. Where images
of missing children are disseminated, it should
be done with the consent of the parents or
legal representative, and should take into account the need to balance the risks faced by
the child with his or her right to privacy. Tools
allowing for the efficient gathering of information from the general public are a useful addition to the comprehensive toolbox for missing
children needed.
Different methods have been put in place at
local, regional and national levels allowing for
such dissemination, including the use of child
alert systems. Child alert systems are used to
swiftly alert the general public at large on missing children cases, following the decision of a
mandated law enforcement agency or organisation with official status regarding missing children, within the framework of a protocol signed
with the national law enforcement authorities,
listing the responsibilities and procedures to be
followed.xvii The European Commission lists 12
member states in which the system has been
put in place.xviii Several national systems have
not yet been used since their establishment.
While child alert systems can be effective in
certain cases of missing children, their remit remains mostly national, and cross-border cooperation between different systems continues to
lag behind. Clear procedures are needed at
both national and cross-border level recordingas to the management and control of 1) the
information shared with the public, and 2) testimonies on sightings regarding the missing
child received from the public.
13 The European
institutions should
encourage member
states to develop child
alert systems in those
countries where they
are not yet available.
These systems should
however not be seen as
sufficient in approaching
the complex issue of
missing children and
need to be embedded
in a broader child
protection approach.
14 Where child alert
systems exist, the
European institutions
should facilitate crossborder cooperation,
as well as coordinated
integration within the
wider set of available
tools. Child alert
coordination should be
done within the existing
formal networks and
should be based on the
2008 best practices for
launching a cross-border
child abduction alert.xix
“If you run away, it means
that it’s too late and
that the situation has
become intolerable. If
nothing happens after
that, if nothing changes,
everything is lost. I often
think my life is over.”
17 year old girl, runaway
“When I told the
police about my fear
of abduction they said
that they couldn’t do
anything if he had not
left. And when he left,
they said: ‘we can’t
do anything in that
country’.”
Mother, parental abduction
“I couldn’t stay,
Not a day went by without nightmares,
It’s not easy to change from one day to
the next, sometimes everything looks black,
That’s why I now want a fresh start.”
Lyrics of a song written by a 16 year old
unaccompanied migrant child in the framework
of an art exhibition “Losing myself: An artistic
interpretation of unaccompanied migrant children who went “missing”.
B. Specific recommendations addressing
vulnerabilities related to targeted groups of
missing children
Missing Children Europe’s 2014 – 2017 strategy focuses on the 3 largest groups of missing
children for which following specific recommendations are suggested to the EU:
1. Runaways
Runaways are children, mostly - but not exclusively - teenagers, who run away from home,
from the people responsible for their care or
from the institution in which they have been
placed. They constitute an average of 50 to
60% of the children reported missing. Over 2%
of the runaway cases reported to 116 000
hotlines for missing children were international
or cross-border.
Many of these children have run away ‘from’
something, such as a situation of abuse, violence or conflict in the home or at school.
Many children running away from home in
fact express having been forced to leave their
home, rather than having left voluntarily. Some
children run away ‘to’ something, which includes situations where children are groomed
over the internet. While being away, these children face multiple risks, from sleeping in unsafe
places to stealing, begging, involvement in
crime gangs and sexual exploitation. Children
who run away more than once have a greater chance of being hurt or harmed. Running
away can have a huge effect on the future
course of life. Some of the runaways abandon
school, break relations with family and friends
and get socially isolated. Homeless organisations report that children who run away before
they are sixteen have an increased likelihood
of ending up on the streets.
Overall, runaway behaviour often requires a
coherent multi-dimensional approach, capable of responding to the multi-dimensional needs of vulnerable young people. The
European Union can play a role in recognising
and addressing these issues.
1
should recognise and
reinforce the understanding
of the problem of runaways
as a social welfare and child
protection issue.
2
should continue to facilitate
services to young people
in crisis and their families,
including through funding
of relevant services and
exchange of best practices
on effective integrated
child protection systems.
Particular emphasis should
be put on preventionxxi of
runaway behaviour, taking
both the push and pull
factors for runningxxii away
into account.
Prevalence of reported cases per age range
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Runaways
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11
Children's ages in years
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Data from
20 hotlines
3 The European
An interesting practice
Debriefing after a runaway episode allows care
organisations to find out what has happened
to children while being away and to provide
effective follow-up care and supervision. Return
interviews are part of the UK Statutory guidance
on children who run away and go missing from
home and care. They provide for an in-depth
conversation by trained professionals with a
child following a running away episode. The return interview aims to establish what has caused
him / her to run away, what experiences and individuals the child has encountered while away
and what could help resolve the issues identified.
institutions should
contribute to raising
awareness among
young people about
1) the risks of running
away, 2) the ways of
seeking alternative
solutions to running
away and 3) available
support if they have
run away. This includes
further promotion of
the 116 000 European
hotline for missing
children.
see i.a. “Here to Listen: Return interview provisions for young runaways” The Children’s Society, 2013
2. Parental abductions
In the European Union, 130.000 international
couples file for divorce annually. Often children
are involved and sometimes devastating conflicts arise. When an international family conflict
escalates, it can lead to an international child
abduction. Children involved in an international parental child abduction are at risk of losing their right to contact (UNCRC Art.9) with the
other parent for an extended period of time. In
some extreme cases, parental abductions end
fatally in a homicidal tragedy.
The international dimension of a family conflict
not only intensifies the conflict, but also makes
it more difficult to resolve. Parental abductions
constitute 37% of the cases handled by missing children hotlines in 2014. 60% of these
cases concerned international or cross-border
abductions.
After the 1980 Hague Child Abduction
Convention,xxiii the Brussels IIa Regulationxxiv has
proven to be an important legal instrument to
solve these abduction cases. However, additional efforts will be needed to make the instrument more efficient.
1 The European
institutions should put
additional effort in
the promotion of the
Brussels IIa Regulation
amongst EU citizens to
increase its effectiveness
as a preventive
instrument.
2 Return procedures
should be sped up to
assure a prompt return
before the child is
settled in his/her new
environment, by tackling
administrative and legal
obstacles that slow
down these procedures.
should tackle the issue
of enforcement problems
of return decisions
when parents refuse to
comply with the decision.
Enforcement problems
are not only causing
unnecessary delays in the
‘prompt’ return of children,
they also, in some cases,
lead to the endorsement
of the unlawful removal of
the child, by allowing the
child to settle in his/her
new environment.
When a parent abducts a child following a
family dispute, (s)he is in many cases unaware
of the unauthorised nature of her/his act. Yet,
the effects of the abduction on the child as well
as on the left behind parent are not to be underestimated.
The Hague Conference on Private and
International Law and other key stakeholders
consider that an agreed solution regarding
the custody of the child can be particularly
helpful for securing the child’s right to maintain
on a regular basis personal relations and direct contact with both parents as foreseen by
the UNCRC. Agreed solutions also tend to be
more sustainable since they are more likely to
be adhered to by the parties.
Missing Children Europe coordinates an international network of bi-national and bi-cultural mediators, trained to provide specialised
co-mediation services. Further efforts are however needed in order to enable parents facing
a conflictual break-up to have access to these
services.
Missing Children Europe welcomes the efforts
of the EP Mediator to collaborate with the
Cross-border Family Mediators’ network and
encourages the EP Mediator’s office to further
consolidate this collaboration, based on the
specific added value of both organisations.
This could allow the EP Mediator to focus on
the promotion and implementation of mediation in the EU Member States as well as at
European level, while the Cross-border Family
Mediators’ Network could focus on the individual mediation relying on its network of trained
member-mediators based on a common
co-mediation model.
4 Missing Children Europe
would welcome a
consolidation of the
cooperation between
the Cross-Border Family
Mediators’ network and
the EP Mediator, allowing
parents to be directed
swiftly to the right services
able to provide the
support needed in their
individual case, as well as
in raising awareness on
the advantages of agreed
solutions in family conflicts
involving children.
should encourage the
development of specific
quality standards for
mediators who mediate
cross-border family
disputes on an EU level.
should encourage member
states to train judicial
professionals who work
with families facing
cross-border conflicts, to
understand and work with
European law instruments
such as the Brussels II
Regulation.
7 The European
Positive developments
Missing Children Europe welcomes the European
Parliament Resolution on the 25th anniversary of
the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
which calls on the member states to facilitate the
smooth accession of Morocco, Singapore, the
Russian Federation, Albania, Andorra, Seychelles,
Gabon and Armenia to the 1980 Hague
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International
Child Abduction.
institutions should reach
out to non-member
states (more specifically
neighbouring states)
to settle cross-border
family disputes via
mediation.
3. Missing unaccompanied migrant children
The problem of missing unaccompanied migrant children is to be understood within the
wider framework of migrating children or ‘children on the move’ and comprises children
who have lost their homes, are escaping violence, poverty or disaster.xxv Others have been
pushed away to search for a better life. Often
beginning their journeys with parents or siblings, many children are in fact intentionally
separated from family members and taken by
child traffickers or smugglers.
23,135 asylum applications were submitted by unaccompanied migrant children
in the EU in 2014, compared to 12,430
in 2013. The number of unaccompanied migrant children who were less than
14 years old almost doubled to 2,240.xxvi
The total amount of children crossing the
EU borders unaccompanied remains unknown, due to underreporting and incoherent data management (in particular regarding non-asylum seeking children) as well as
to the nature of the issue. Estimations from
across EU member states indicate that an
average 50% of these children go missing
within the first 48 hours upon arrival in accommodation, care or observation centres.xxvii
Efficient responses to the disappearance of
these children are lagging behind, as can
be illustrated from following findings from the
2013 EC study on missing children:xxviii
- Only four EU member states have legal
or procedural regulations on missing
migrant children.
on their own initiative, children in their search of
a better life often end up in even worse scenarios than those they left behind, falling victim
to trafficking, sexual exploitation, economic exploitation, including forced donation of organs,
forced drug smuggling and begging. Many
missing unaccompanied migrant children are
never found.
The following building blocks should be considered in order for a coordinated strategic
approach on missing unaccompanied migrant
children to become a reality:
-Missing unaccompanied migrant chil dren receive a lower priority than other
missing children cases in at least two
member states, where there is a fixed ‘no
action’ period before the start of local
police investigations.
- In some member states, a missing
unaccompanied
migrant
child’s
asylum application will be considered as
‘withdrawn’ if the child has not returned
in three days. No further investigative
action is taken in this situation.
Going missing is often the beginning of a journey into exploitation. Whether pushed away or
> Operationalising child
protection commitments
Children are better protected from trafficking
and exploitation when their rights to a safe
and healthy development are safeguarded in practice. As a basic principle, member
states should uphold the rights of every child
in the context of migration, irrespectively of the
child’s migration status, in accordance with the
UNCRC,xxix the Treaty on the European Union,
EU Charter on Fundamental Rights and other
relevant EU legislation. Steps should be undertaken to make child rights a reality for every
child, including unaccompanied migrant children who do not apply for asylum and face
additional levels of vulnerability.
1
should closely monitor and
supervise the implementation
and application of the
existing Directives, ensuring
access to services (incl. food,
medical care & education),
protection (incl. specialized
support provided by trained
personnel) justice and
clear information for all
unaccompanied migrant
children.
2 Infringement procedures
should be considered in case
of incomplete or incorrect
implementation or application
of EU standards for the
protection and reception
of unaccompanied migrant
children.
3 The comprehensive strategy
on missing unaccompanied
children announced by the
European Commission in
the European Agenda on
Migration should prioritise
operational developments to
improve the assessment of
the needs of unaccompanied
children at risk of going
missing, as well as cross
border cooperation in cases
of disappearances.
should ensure that
unaccompanied children
can apply for international
protection in the country
where they are and that
the best interest of the
child always prevails on
the basis of an individual
examination of the case. The
Council should support the
report of MEP Wikström on
the European Commission’s
proposal to amend
Article 8(4) of the Dublin
Regulation.xxxii
> Shift of focus to
child protection
The existing focus on managed returns or
transfers has an impact on the disappearance
of unaccompanied migrant children. Some
children undertake very dangerous journeys,
hoping to find better living conditions. Very often they aim at joining a member of the family
already settled in a European member state,
which most of the time does not coincide with
the first country of arrival of the child. When
confronted with the risk of repatriation or transfer, they choose to run away,xxx increasing the
levels of danger they face. Afraid of being
placed back in the situation they tried to escape from in the first place, these children fall
victim to a trafficking cycle. A shift in mentality is
needed to move away from a transfer or return
home policy, to a child protection approach,
taking into account the individual and specific
situation of the child.
should consider negotiating
a Recast Family Protection
Directive, replacing the
current outdated legislation.
xxxiii
Furthermore, legislators
should consider the necessity
to speed up procedures
reunifying unaccompanied
children with their families,
when this corresponds to
their best interest, and to
automatically extend the
status accorded to the
principal applicant to the child
member of his/her family.
6
should work with the Council
of Europe in promoting
and implementing a ‘life
project approach’ for each
individual unaccompanied
migrant child - taking into
account i.a. his/her personal
profile, migration itinerary,
family environment, his/
her expectations - covering
different aspects of his/
her life from housing,
health, education to
personal development,
cultural development, social
integration and future
employment.xxxiv
7 The European
institutions should
stimulate and promote
the further harmonising
of standardsxxxvi and
practices for guardians
and reception centres
across the different
member states.xxxviii
> Practical measures and standards within
member states on missing unaccompanied
migrant children
Professional standards for guardians and reception centres can have a preventative impact on the disappearance of unaccompanied migrant children. Although some member
states have procedures in place to ensure a
minimum standard and level of training for
guardians and reception centre professionals,
the gap in these standards varies hugely from
one member state to another.
Only four EU member states have legal or
procedural regulations on missing migrant
children. Missing unaccompanied migrant children receive a lower priority than other missing children cases in at least 2 member states,
where there is a fixed ‘no action’ period before
the start of local police investigations.
8 The European
institutions should
promote the equal
treatment of all missing
children as well as
the abolishment of
standard ‘no action’
periods applied before
the start of local
police investigations
for unaccompanied
migrant children in some
member states.
Cooperation protocols outlining roles and responsibilities, methods of communication and
data reporting duties have been put in place
in some countries between 116 000 hotlines
for missing children, reception centres and
law enforcement authorities. These protocols
facilitate interagency cooperation in cases of
missing unaccompanied migrant children and
should be stimulated involving the different
stakeholders concerned.
Safeguarding
Unaccompanied
Migrant
Children from going Missing by Identifying
Best Practices and Training Actors on
Interagency Cooperation.
The EC funded SUMMIT project was launched in
November 2014 to:
1. identify best practices in the prevention of and
response to vulnerable unaccompanied migrant
children going missing from reception centres.
2. develop guidance for improved interagency
cooperation
3. facilitate implementation of the guidance
through joined seminars involving all relevant
actors.
9
The European
institutions should
promote cooperation
between 116 000
hotlines for missing
children, national
law enforcement,
guardianship services
and reception centres
in preventing the
disappearance of
unaccompanied migrant
children.
> Reinforce prevention
programmes in countries
of origin
Humanitarian and other programmes allow
to prevent children from embarking upon
dangerous migration trajectories. Such programmes should foresee both the promotion
of effective protection measures for children as
well as the funding of programmes aimed at
preventing children from being sent away or
leaving their country voluntarily in search for a
better life.
10 The European
institutions should
continue the promotion
of effective protection
measures for children
as well as the funding
of programmes aimed
at preventing children
from being sent
away or leave their
countries voluntarily
thus embarking upon
dangerous journeys.
Research undertaken i.a. in the UK provides for an understanding of the
vulnerability of runaways. See i.a. “Still Running (3), Early findings from our third
national survey of young runaways”, The Children’s Society, 2011, Pg 18:
18% runaways sleep rough, 20% apply dangerous survival strategies, 11%
are physically hurt or harmed – or “Running from hate to what you think is
love: The relationship between running away and child sexual exploitation”,
Bernardo’s 2013
i
See “Missing children in the European Union: Mapping, data collection
and statistics,” European Commission – Directorate-General for Justice,
2013: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/missing_children_
study_2013_en.pdf
ii
See for illustration: “Missing children in the European Union: Mapping, data
collection and statistics” p.34:
iii
“A first look at the overall figures for child disappearances revealed
inconsistencies that are still unexplained based on what we were able to
establish regarding definitions and collection methods during the mapping
phase. These inconsistencies will need to be explored further with the relevant
authorities. For instance, three countries with similar population sizes – France,
Italy and the United Kingdom - provided very different figures: for 2012,
France reports 50,326 cases, Italy only 5,513 and in the United Kingdom
figures from just two thirds of the local police forces already arrive at a total
of 96,341 cases.“
Data collection efforts should include at least following data sources,
national law enforcement authorities, central authorities, 116000 hotlines
for missing children, child alert coordinating bodies, Frontex, Europol and
Interpol.
iv
Data collected from 116 000 missing children hotlines in 2014 estimates
that over 25% of missing children cases reported are cross border in nature.
v
For more information on child protection systems, see i.a. “Adapting systems
approach to child protection: key concepts and considerations”, Unicef,
2010 at http://www.unicef.org/protection/files/Adapting_Systems_Child_Protection_Jan__2010.pdf
vi
See http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/fundamental-rights/opinion/140402_en.htm or “David’s Story: the role of national child protection
systems”, Save the Children, 2011 at http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/
sites/default/files/documents/3991.pdf
vii
This could be achieved by including missing children exchanges in the
European Commission’s annual Forum on the Rights of the Child, regular
updates on missing children issues and developments on the “Rights of
the Child” page of the EC website at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/hotline/index_en.htm or ad hoc campaigns targeting
relevant professionals and stakeholders.
viii
The Netherlands indicate that young people predominantly run away from
problems in the family. Changes in the family structure such as family breakup or a new partner for one of the parents may be a trigger for running
away. Other problems include, among others, maltreatment, sexual abuse,
problems at school/bullying.
Pull factors include at least following categories: Running to be near friends /
family, which seems to occur regularly with children running away from care.
While this category may lead to less risks during the running away, they
should be taken into account to make sure responses are balanced with
the needs.
A more worrying pull factor is grooming: children being groomed over the
internet are seen as particularly vulnerable and questions arise as to possible
links with trafficking: One in seven endangered runaways reported to the
National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (US) in 2013 were likely sex
trafficking victims.
The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of
International Child Abduction
xxiii
Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning
jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial
matters and the matters of parental responsibility
xix
For further reading, see also PICUM’s work on undocumented children at
http://picum.org/en/news/blog/45627/ or “Destination Unknown”: an international campaign to protect children on the move led by Terre des Hommes
International Federation at https://destination-unknown.org or the Separated
Children in Europe Programme at http://www.separated-children-europe-programme.org/ or the CONNECT project on Identifying good practices in, and
improving, the connections between actors involved in reception, protection
and integration of unaccompanied children in Europe.
xxv
Eurostat data, see http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/
product_details/dataset?p_product_code=MIGR_ASYUNAA
xxvi
In Belgium, research undertaken by Child Focus recorded that unaccompanied children seeking asylum disappear in approximately 25 % of the cases within the first 48 hours upon arrival. In the UK, the British Asylum Screening
Unit reported that 60% of the unaccompanied children accommodated in
UK social care centres go missing and are never found. In Hungary, experts
report that whilst asylum seeking children rarely go missing, non-asylum seeking children often disappear within the first 24-48 hours. They are not usually
recorded until after this time has elapsed.
xxvii
“Missing children in the European Union: Mapping, data collection
and statistics,” European Commission – Directorate-General for Justice,
2013: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/missing_children_
study_2013_en.pdf
xxviii
ix
See http://missingchildreneurope.eu/hotline for a map with links of the
national 116 000 hotline operators
xxix
x
See “The European hotline number for missing children: A practical guide for
hotline operators,” 2011: http://www.hotline116000.eu/pdf/practical_guide_
for_hotline_operators.pdf (Guide available in 14 languages)
xxx
A budget of 1.873.765€ was made available by the European Commission for running costs of 116 000 hotlines in 2012 and 4.5 million euro was
earmarked for 2013 -2014. Hotlines are currently uncertain about funding
beyond 2014. Without European funding, several hotlines will most likely
have to seize activities and others will have to downscale the support given
to parents and children over recent years.
xxxi
xi
xii
Directive 2009/136/EC
xiii
See Missing Children Europe Annual Report 2013
See Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and the
Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a Rights, Equality and Citizenship
Programme for the period 2014 to 2020
xiv
See also note 6015 /14 of 3 February 2014 from the Presidency to Working Party for Schengen Matters (SIS/SIRENE) / (Mixed Committee - EU/Iceland/
Norway and Switzerland/Liechtenstein) Categorisation of missing children
alerts in SIS II
xvi
A child temporarily or permanently deprived of his/her family shall be
entitled to special protection and assistance to be provided by state.
A Dublin Transfer refers to transfers of asylum seekers from the state where
they apply to the state deemed responsible for them. Return refers to unaccompanied children being returned to their country of origin.
COM(2014)382final: Proposal for a regulation of the EP and of the
Council amending Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 as regards determining the
Member State responsible for examining the application for international
protection of unaccompanied children with no family member, sibling or
relative legally present in a Member State.
In line with the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of
Human Rights of January 2011, M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece, MA and others
6 June 2013, CJEU case C-648/11 (no.30696/09).
xxxii
See: Council Directive 2003/86/EC: The current legislation, adopted in
2003, is outdated under many aspects (for example, the concept of family
is narrower when compared to the definition adopted in the Recast Dublin
Regulation and the personal scope of the Directive excludes the beneficiaries
of subsidiary protection).
xxxiii
See CoE “Recommendation on life projects for unaccompanied migrant
children, 2007 and Life Projects
xxxiv
See also Commission staff working Document: “Best practice for launching
a cross-border child abduction alert” SEC(2008)2912 final, p. 3
for unaccompanied migrant children, A handbook for front-line professionals,
2010 and FRA “Comparative report on Separated, asylum-seeking children
in European Union Member States”, 2010
See http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/alert-mechanism/index_en.htm.
xxxv
xvii
xviii
Commission staff working Document: “Best practice for launching a
cross-border child abduction alert” SEC(2008)2912 final,
xix
See http://missingchildreneurope.eu/news/Post/537/Losing-myself-An-artistic-interpretation-of-unaccompanied-migrant-children-who-went-missing
xx
Primary and secondary prevention are of importance “Primary” prevention
addresses individual and family level factors correlated with later criminal
participation. Individual level factors such as attachment to school and
involvement in pro-social activities decrease the probability of criminal
involvement. (…) “Secondary” prevention uses techniques focusing on risk situations such as youth who are dropping out of school or getting involved in
gangs. It targets social programs and law enforcement at neighbourhoods
where crime rates are high. The use of secondary crime prevention in cities
such as Birmingham and Bogotá have achieved large reductions in crime
and violence. Programs that are focused on youth at risk have been shown
to significantly reduce crime (Quote from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Crime_prevention).
xxi
Push Factors for running away can be very diverse : Sabo A. Schouten and
Paul van den Eshof, “Report on missing persons in the Netherlands, Germany,
United Kingdom and Australia”, National Criminal Intelligence Department,
xxii
Council Directive 2003/86/EC
See also FRA “Guardianship for children deprived of parental care: A
handbook to reinforce guardianship system to cater for the specific needs of
child victims of trafficking” 2014
xxxvi
Standards should include limits as to the number of children assigned
to one guardian, allowing guardians to conduct their tasks in a meaningful
way. xxxvii
The following standards and practices should in particular be considered
in the context of preventing and supporting unaccompanied migrant
children from going missing:
xxxviii
- A guardian should be appointed immediately following the first encounter
with the unaccompanied migrant child, and pro-actively engage into
preventing the child from going missing. Prevention should always be first
priority and best practices in this regard should continue to be investigated
and shared.
- Guardians and reception centre professionals should have access to
the necessary resources and training allowing them to give the highest
possible priority to the child’s safety, knowing the risks and signals related to
disappearance.
- Guardians and reception centre professionals should ensure that there is
systematic recording at the point when UAMs are discovered to have gone
missing, regardless of their nationality or residency status.
- Guardians and reception centre professionals should seek cooperation
with the police, local authorities, child protection authorities and 116 000
hotlines to pool knowledge and to develop more comprehensive preventative strategies and to keep contact with all relevant actors concerning
specific children.
- Where guardianship services are being provided by voluntary associations
or NGO’s, it should be done in the framework of written official protocols of
cooperation.
- Reception centres and guardians should be aware of the differing procedures in handling a child from another member state vs an unaccompanied child from a third country. They should also be aware of the differing
challenges that each of these groups face and how to react appropriately
considering the case specific situation.
Missing Children Europe full members
Austria 147 Rat auf Draht
BelgiumChild Focus
Bulgaria Nadja Centre Foundation
Cyprus Consortium: SPAVO & HFC Czech Republic
Nadace Nase Dite
Denmark Thora Center
Estonia Estonian Advice Center
France APEV, CFPE, La Mouette
Germany Weisser Ring
Greece Smile of the Child
Hungary Kék Vonal
Italy
SOS Telefono Azzurro
Ireland ISPCC
Lithuania Missing Persons’ Families Support Centre
PortugalIAC
Poland Itaka
Romania Focus Romania, Salvati Copiii
Slovakia Linka Detskej Istoty
Spain ANAR, Protegeles
Switzerland
Missing Children Switzerland, SSI
The Netherlands The International Child Abduction Centre
United Kingdom Missing People
Missing Children Europe associate members
Czech Republic
Ztracene dite
Croatia
Centre for missing and exploited children
SerbiaAstra
Full members
Associate members
Colophon
January 2015
Responsible editor: Delphine Moralis
Rue de l’Industrie 10, 1000 Brussels
Photography: Daniel Osorio
Memorandum drafted with the support and input of
Missing Children Europe members as well as external
stakeholders and experts, including law enforcement
representatives.
Contacts
For more information, please contact:
Delphine Moralis, Secretary General
delphine.moralis@missingchildreneurope.eu
 MissingChildrenEurope
 MissingChildEu
 Rue de l’Industrie 10, 1000, Brussels, Belgium
 +32 2 894 74 84
 www.missingchildreneurope.eu
With the financial support of the “Rights, Equality and Citizenship
2014-2020“ Programme of the European Union. The contents of this
publication are the sole responsibility of Missing Children Europe and
can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission.

missing children memorandum to the eu

Transcription

Similar documents

Missing Children Europe

Sustainable Design (22) Big-Picture Health Information (27

here - Missing Children Europe

Click

What does “Commercial/Industrial Mean to NAHBA Today?

Student Media Grant, condev.org

IWF/INHOPE

Supplement re Berry Knoll Sale

Assessment of Progress, Regional Cooperation in JHA Area

development of mountain bicycle routes in western balkans