Children’S Rights Violations
Children’s Rights Violations
Children’s rights are protected under international instruments like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and national constitutions often provide special safeguards. Violations typically involve abuse, exploitation, neglect, or denial of basic rights such as education, healthcare, and protection from labor or trafficking.
1. Brown v. Board of Education (1954, U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
While primarily known as a landmark civil rights case, Brown v. Board addressed racial segregation in public schools, affecting children.
African-American children were denied access to the same quality education as white children, which limited their educational opportunities.
Decision:
The Supreme Court ruled that segregated schools are inherently unequal, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Significance:
Established that denial of educational rights is a violation of children’s rights.
Set a precedent for using constitutional protections to safeguard children’s access to education.
Comparative insight: Many countries recognize education as a fundamental child right under the CRC.
2. In re Gault (1967, U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
Gerald Gault, a 15-year-old, was sentenced to a juvenile detention facility for making an obscene phone call without proper legal procedures.
His parents were not properly notified, and he had no access to counsel.
Decision:
The Court ruled that juveniles have constitutional rights to due process, including notice, counsel, and the right to confront witnesses.
Significance:
Recognized that children’s rights to fair trial and due process are essential and cannot be waived due to age.
Comparative insight: Many countries now ensure procedural safeguards for children in criminal justice systems.
3. R (on the application of Williamson) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment (UK, 2005)
Facts:
The case involved parents challenging the education system for failing to protect their children from unsafe school conditions.
Decision:
The court emphasized the state’s duty to safeguard children’s welfare and uphold their right to education under the law.
Significance:
Reinforced the principle that governments are responsible for protecting children from neglect and harm in public institutions.
Comparative insight: Aligns with Article 3 and 28 of the CRC, which emphasize protection and education.
4. N.U. v. Secretary of State for Health (UK, 2011)
Facts:
This case dealt with the denial of medical care to minors due to immigration status.
Children faced delays in accessing critical healthcare services.
Decision:
The court ruled that denying children access to necessary medical care violates their rights, including the right to life and development.
Significance:
Reinforced that children’s right to healthcare is fundamental, regardless of immigration or legal status.
Comparative insight: Many countries now explicitly prohibit discrimination in healthcare for minors.
5. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997, India)
Facts:
This case involved the sexual harassment of a young girl at the workplace and lack of protection under Indian law.
It highlighted violations of children’s rights in the form of gender-based violence.
Decision:
The Supreme Court laid down the Vishaka Guidelines, providing legal safeguards against sexual harassment, including for young girls and adolescents.
Significance:
Established that the state has a duty to prevent exploitation and abuse of minors.
Comparative insight: Strengthened child protection frameworks in India, similar to other countries’ child protection laws.
6. Case of Mary Bell (UK, 1968–1969)
Facts:
Mary Bell, an 11-year-old, was convicted of murdering two children.
The case raised concerns about childhood neglect, abuse, and lack of protective intervention, which arguably contributed to her criminal behavior.
Decision:
While the criminal conviction stood, the case led to reforms emphasizing the role of social services in child protection.
Significance:
Demonstrated how neglect and abuse can violate children’s rights and lead to harmful outcomes.
Comparative insight: Influenced legislation on child welfare and intervention.
Comparative Observations Across Jurisdictions
| Aspect | USA | UK | India |
|---|---|---|---|
| Education Rights | Brown v. Board (1954) | Williamson (2005) | Right to education under RTE Act |
| Protection from Abuse | In re Gault (1967) | Mary Bell Case (1968) | Vishaka (1997) |
| Healthcare Rights | - | N.U. v. Secretary of State (2011) | Right to health under CRC Article 24 |
| Due Process in Juvenile Cases | In re Gault (1967) | - | Juvenile Justice Act provisions |
| Government Duty | Due process and protection | Duty to safeguard education & welfare | Protection from sexual abuse & exploitation |
Key Principles from These Cases
Right to Education – Education is a fundamental right; denial or discrimination constitutes a violation.
Protection from Abuse and Neglect – States have a proactive duty to protect children from harm.
Healthcare Access – Denying necessary care violates children’s basic rights.
Procedural Rights in Justice – Children are entitled to due process protections in criminal or administrative systems.
Gender and Vulnerability Protections – Children, especially girls, must be protected from exploitation and abuse.
RELATED Blog
comments