The Rights of Child Soldiers in Northern Uganda: Analysis of some relevant human

rights policy documents and an alternative

Introduction:

History of the conflict

A war in Northern Uganda, often described as one of the most neglected humanitarian

emergencies, began in 1986 between the rebel “Lord’s Resistance Army” (LRA) and the

government of Uganda (GoU). At the height of the conflict (2002-2005), more than 1.8

million people, (80% of the Northern Uganda population) were forced to flee their homes and

live in displacement camps where an estimated 1,000 people died every week

(http://www2.invisiblechildren.com and http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf).

The LRA rebel movement can be traced back to Alice Lakwena (1980’s) who believed the

Holy Spirit ordered her to overthrow the GoU for being unjust to the Acholi people. Lakwena

and her followers, known as the “Holy Spirit Movement”, gained momentum as resentment

towards the GoU increased. When Lakwena was exiled, Kony, claiming to be Lakwena’s

cousin, took control and transformed Lakwena’s rebel army into the LRA. However, the

LRA did not receive the same support and with dwindling approval for their cause and

heightened government offensives, the rebels resorted to violently abducting children and

indoctrinating them into their ranks. It is estimated that more than 90% of the LRA’s troops

were abducted as children (about 30,000 to 66,000 children). These children were forced to

terrorize their own communities and other civilians by cutting off the hands, ears, or lips of

individuals who were suspected of sympathizing with the government. The nature and

duration of the conflict has created tremendous humanitarian, social, and economic costs for

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 1

all of Uganda, particularly for children. The GoU's attempt to protect its citizens from this

rebel militia largely failed, and this has resulted in an entire generation of youth with no

experience of peace. Although in recent years Northern Uganda has become more secure,

sustained peace still continues to elude many. Many argue that child protection has not been a

priority for governments, despite national and international laws guaranteeing their basic

rights (http://www2.invisiblechildren.com/history-of-the-war, and

http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf/learn/globalissues-uganda).

Against this historical backdrop of the context of Northern Uganda, this essay will seek to do

the following in relation to the plight of child soldiers:

1) Section One:

a) Will justify why Uganda was chosen for the purpose of this study.

b) Draw from research in other contexts and propose likely reasons why child soldiers were

recruited by the LRA. It should be noted that while some authors were not speaking

specifically about Uganda, they were making the point that there are important questions

about how universal rights as well as contextual rights can be understood, applied and upheld

so as to protect and support the child in his own peculiar context, in the best possible manner.

2) Section Two:

It will discuss the social construction of childhood and argue that it is an appropriate

framework because it offers the researcher a way of looking at the rights of child soldiers in a

way that both recognises their vulnerability as well as their agency. It then compares the

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC (1989))1 and the African

1 The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) an international convention safeguarding the human rights of all children (under the age of 18) was brought into practice 1989. It is ratified by all nations but the USA and Somalia (www.unicef.org).

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 2

Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC). Thereafter due to the limited

scope of this study, three relevant rights (Article 32, 43 and 54) from the United Nations

Human Rights (UNHR, 1948) are discussed. Although all the rights in the UNHR are equally

important, rights relating to liberty, security, slavery, torture, inhuman treatment etc. were

specifically chosen for discussion, in the context of this essay.

3) Section Three:

This section will carry out an analysis of the policy documents in relation to the rights of

child soldiers. It will examine the utility and shortcomings of the following:

a) the UNCRC (1989),

b) the ACRWC (1999) and

c) selected rights from the UNHR (1948).

It will recommend that using a re-contextualised framework of child rights, through the lens

of sociology of childhood, is more useful because it recognises the importance of having a

more context based understanding of issues with the child at the centre of the discourse.

2 Article 3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person (www.un.org).

3 Article 4: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms (www.un.org).

4 Article 5: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (www.un.org)

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 3

Section one:

Justification for choosing Uganda for the study

The plight of child soldiers in Uganda was chosen because the researcher had some years

earlier watched a documentary by the BBC entitled “Invisible Children”

(http://www2.invisiblechildren.com/history-of-the-war). She was particularly disturbed to see

the plight of the children who became night commuters, as they tried to escape being

abducted and forced to participate in the LRA and to commit atrocities on their own families.

She was struck by the childrens’, in Freeman’s words “lack of right to possess rights”

(Freeman 2007:8) the sheer dehumanisation of the children and the stripping away of their

humanity. This essay thus offered an opportunity to examine the rights of children who

suffered hardship in the context of a brutal war in Northern Uganda. In order to have a better

understanding of the context the following paragraphs highlight some of the specific

contextual implications of how and why the children soldiers transitioned from helpless

victims to unwilling perpetrators of war to willing accomplices and participants.

The context of the child soldiers in Uganda

1) Why and how child soldiers?

Human Rights Watch (an NGO) worked in Northern Uganda during the war period, and

carried out research to examine the LRA and the plight of the children involved in LRA.

Their report (2003:7) notes that very young children were abducted by the LRA, including

girls, who were taken as slaves. Brett and McCallin (1998) note in a UNICEF report that

entire villages were terrorized by the LRA’s child soldiers with AK-47s. The children were

also used to loot villages, abduct other children and kill those who try to escape. Indeed,

research from other contexts seems to suggest that it was (Boyden, 2003; and Boyden and

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 4

Berry, 2004) likely that the LRA preferred child soldiers over adults because they were easily

intimidated, more loyal, agile and impressionable and could thus be assigned hazardous tasks

without resistance. Consequently it was to their advantage to abduct children.

While not examining the specific context of Northern Uganda, there is research done in other

contexts which can help understand this context better, thus the references used here are not

specific to Uganda but help to shed light on the issues at stake. Some researchers emphasise

the lack of agency, rights and decision making on the part of the children when they were

abducted, but others such as Tefferi (2008) highlight other aspects. She points out that

although there is a wide held assumption that children were generally speaking, compelled

and abducted; her research shows that there are a range of other factors that sometimes led

the children to voluntarily join the LRA such as material gain.

Similarly, findings by Human Rights Watch (2003:21) found that young boys voluntarily

joined the LRA for monetary gain, which was their only hope of survival and an escape from

a life of humiliation, hopelessness and powerlessness. Others may have joined out of

victimization and peer pressure (Alfredsom, 2002:1-2). Despite the risks, still other children

may have joined the LRA because it answered a deep emotional and psychological need

(Woodhead, 1998 in Boyden and Mann, 2005:16) to be part of a community at a time when

their own families were totally broken. Indeed, as Tefferi (2008) and Brett and Specht (2004)

point out, as a consequence of war, the community and family structures get weakened and as

the children’s normal environment is disrupted, their psycho-social needs of agency, power,

worth and capability remain unmet. Furthermore, Wessells’ (2005:4-5) research shows that as

child soldiers struggle for meaning and identity in their lives, ironically these needs begun to

be addressed in the new community, even as they were abused. In the context of the LRA, it

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 5

meant that over time, the children begin to voluntarily participate in the LRA as they

struggled for identity and acceptance from a community.

However, Alfredson’s (2002), research does not agree entirely with Tefferi (2008) because he

notes that there is a fine line between forced and voluntary involvement of children as in

many cases they are innocent victims of a harsh socio-political environment which compels

them to make choices which they would not normally make.

Additionally, Brett and McCallin’s (1998) research (though not Ugandan) shows that

interestingly, many abducted children experienced positive sensations such as joy, a sense of

glamour, fame, admiration and excitement when they accomplished challenging tasks set by

their abductors. Boyden (2003) also points out that children sometimes in their naivety, often

lack an adequate understanding of right from wrong, and therefore may commit acts (even

rape, murder, looting) unknowing of their consequences. Furthermore, Brett and Specht

(2004) suggest that in some instances, the children are incited to revenge against their

families by their captors. Overtime, the children transition took place from innocent victims,

to forced perpetrators and to willing accomplices. The situation is very complex and has a

combination of social, political, religious and personal factors which contribute to making it

extremely difficult for children to comprehend their reality.

Section Two:

Why is the Social Construction of Childhood a useful approach?

Some of the reasons (there may be others) why the sociology of childhood is a useful

approach for exploring the specific issues of child soldiers in Northern Uganda is because it:

a) recognises children as social actors, and emphasises their everyday life challenges

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 6

b) recognises the importance of acknowledging the ways in which children orientate

themselves in society, engage with the cultural activities and religious/social values

c) seeks to understand the social worlds which children construct and take part in

d) examines and approaches children as active participants and members of society

e) emphasises the voice of the child (Mayall, 2004).

Indeed, Mayall (2000), although while not speaking specifically about the Ugandan war,

noted that children, usually fall prey to adult notions of childhood as they lack the voice and

power to have their issues heard from their own standpoint, and as such that their issues

expressed in their own voices are hardly ever considered. Archard (1993:66) also highlights

this - “What makes it (the right to be heard) valuable is both that there is a point to making

one's views known and, further, that making one's views known makes a difference.” This is

an important point because it is critical to ensure that “children’s own understandings and

perspectives across cultures and of their active contributions to their well-being, coping, and

very survival” (Boyden and Mann, 2005:20) are acknowledged and understood, and this is

key to understanding the child and his/her rights, in his/her own context, his/her reintegration

and rehabilitation. The starting point to progress is the child, and the child is empowered

knowing that his/her voice makes a difference.

Consequently, in the sociology of childhood approach, children are analysed not as

“outsiders” or as “emergent” members of society, but as having inherent rights,

responsibilities, challenges and victories (Boyden and Mann, 2005). Their rights are sought to

be recognised, upheld and acknowledged as important from the outset (Archard, 1993), such

that their actions, resistance, cooperation, and collective action amongst their peers and their

interactions with their wider, specific community and particular context is taken into account

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 7

when trying to understand them and their challenges (Boyden and Mann, 2005). This is very

important because as Mayall (2000) points out, children’s rights are acknowledged and

upheld if there is a better understanding of their specific and particular social conditions and

she thus recommends that policy makers and academics espouse new paradigms to

understand children better, using this lens.

The sociology of childhood offers a framework which puts the child at the centre of the

discourse on child rights. However, in many cases it is not popularly applied, and more

commonly, general policies which uphold children’s rights are used.

The next section examines and compares popularly applied child rights policy documents.

The UNCRC (1989) and ACRWC (1999) and UNHR (1948)

The UNCRC (1989) focuses on the best interests of the child and it has been the very first

legal international document which covers an entire spectrum of human rights—cultural,

civil, political, economic, and social rights— for children (www.unicef.org/crc). It re-

examined the status of childhood and the responsibilities of adults and governments to ensure

provision, security and rights to children (Freeman, 2007 in Mayall, 2004:42). The UNCRC

(1989) re-examined the status of childhood and the responsibilities entrusted upon adults and

governments to ensure provision, security and rights of children. It also included, according

to Boyden and Mann (2005) the protection of children from adversity as one of its key

priorities. According to policy makers, generally speaking, the UNCRC (1989) offered a

complete global framework to support children in both episodic and chronic conditions of

stress and it embraced the moral and ethical view that each child is entitled by right, to

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 8

special considerations. Furthermore, it emphasised that children in exceptionally harsh and

extreme situations ought to receive greater concern (Boyden and Mann, 2005:3).

The provisions of the UNCRC (1989) are classified into the "three Ps", which are the rights

to Provision, Protection and Participation.

a) Provision recognizes the right to provision of assistance for their basic needs i.e. resources

and services to ensure their survival and development (eg. healthcare Article 24).

b) Protection ensures rights of children from exploitation and cruelty, arbitrary separation

from family and abuses in the criminal justice system, i.e. acts that threaten their dignity and

survival (eg protection and care Article 3).

c) Participation ensures rights to freedom to express opinions and engagement in processes of

change and prepare them for an active part in society (eg the right to be heard in legal

proceedings Article 12).

In the context of the child soldiers, it appears that all three fundamental rights were violated

(when they were abducted and forced to become soldiers), and because rights are indivisible,

all their other rights, including their ability to act as independent agents was undermined.

Freeman (2007:8) notes that “agents are decision-makers. They are people who can negotiate

with others, who are capable of altering relationships or decisions, who can shift social

assumptions and constraints”. Clearly, the child soldiers in Northern Uganda had none of

these options; they had no right to provision (as their basic survival was dependent upon their

captors), no right to participation (no choices available, no power or voice to negotiate) and

no right to protection (their security was under continual threat) and thus they had no

independent agency. Freeman (2007:8) also explains “as agents, rights-bearers can

participate. They can make their own lives, rather than having their lives made for them. And

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 9

participation is a fundamental human right. It enables us to demand rights” (Freeman,

2007:8). For the Ugandan children, their fundamental right to participation had been

snatched away, their life was determined by their circumstances, by their captors and

demanding any sort of rights was an impossibility.

However, the UNCRC, according to some scholars (eg Archard, 1993:64) has failed to cover

adequately or address the rights of all children based on their different contexts. For instance,

he argues, a more context based, nuanced document is The Preamble5 of the African Charter

of the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC) (1999). It is far more meaningful because it

appears to adopt the sociology of childhood and puts the child and his contextual and

personal needs at the centre of the discourse. The ACRWC stipulates children’s rights for

African countries, which intended to complement the UNCRC and also to address the

specific realities of children in Africa (www.crin.org).

The next section discusses the similarities and differences between the two treaties and

highlights why the ACRWC is more applicable for examining the rights of child soldiers in

Uganda.

Like the UNCRC (1989), the ACRWC (1999) makes provisions for principles of non-

discrimination and participation. In addition it addresses issues pertinent to African children

eg apartheid, female genital mutilation (FGM), internal conflicts and displacement,

(http://www.unicef.org/esaro/children_youth_5930.html) etc. All of these issues are specific

5 RECOGNIZING that the child, due to the needs of his physical and mental development requires particular care with regard to health, physical, mental, moral and social development, and requires legal protection in conditions of freedom, dignity and security… (www.africa-union.org)

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 10

to the African continent and therefore not addressed in the UNCRC (1989). The ACRWC

(1999) thus goes further than the UNCRC (1989) in addressing child’s rights.

An example of the difference where the ACRWC takes into consideration cultural

implications is where in addition to rights and privileges which are accorded to the child, the

ACRWC also confers (upon the child) certain additional responsibilities i.e. a child has a duty

of care towards his/her elders as well as the responsibility of upholding the values and

solidarity which are generally speaking, common to African culture. This provision in the

ACRWC seeks to instil citizenship, societal and communal responsibility upon the child

which it believes are beneficial to the child, his family but also the larger community in

which he lives and works. In the context of Uganda, from a very young age, children who

have grown up in small communities or villages would be aware of their responsibilities

towards others, and they would be likely to have a strong sense of clanship and cultural

values. In contrast, the UNCRC (1989) does not explicitly confer any responsibility on the

child. It does emphasize citizenship participation which might be extended to family and

communal responsibility, but as rights. It stresses on the importance of a child’s participation

and contribution in matters pertaining to his/her rights. Thus, when the child is abducted by

the LRA, not only are her/his rights denied, but s/he is also deprived of the opportunity to

carry out her/his responsibilities, but even further, by harming her/his family s/he is actually

acting in contravention to these. The psychological impact of this on the child is arguably

thus more traumatic. As Boyden and Mann (2005:4) point out, it is thus imperative that the

child’s social and cultural context must be borne in mind when trying to understand their

rights, responsibilities, agency and culpability because it is more nuanced and more complex

than it prima facie appears to be.

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 11

A further difference, within the context of rights with regard to children’s involvement in

armed conflict, is the age of child participation in the two documents. While the definition of

a child is consistent as under the age of 18, the ACRWC entirely prohibits and condemns the

use of ‘children’ in any direct conflict and hostilities. Anyone under the age of 18 must not be

recruited and if at all they are, they must not participate directly in hostilities. The UNCRC

(1989), on the other hand, permits children as young as 15 to participate in direct hostilities.

However, interestingly, the UNCRC does not totally ban or condemn children’s involvement

in any direct hostilities. This appears to be a shortfall, according to some scholars (eg Rosen

2005) in the UNCRC. If the UNCRC were applied in the context of Uganda, it would be very

problematic as it is less strict on age and appears that it would, by its strictest application,

allow children to participate in the LRA. Indeed, for Rosen (2005), even though the UNCRC

(1989) is a very strong and influential policy document on the welfare of children, he firmly

believes, it is inadequate, because it fails to completely abolish the use of child soldiers in

Article 386.

This distinction between the ACRWC (1999) and the UNCRC (1989) highlights the fact that

the former is more cognisant of African issues and has tried its best to protect the child, even 6

? Article 38

1. States Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for rules of international humanitarian law applicable to them in armed conflicts which are relevant to the child

2. States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that persons who have not attained the age of fifteen years do not take a direct part in hostilities

3. States Parties shall refrain from recruiting any person who has not attained the age of fifteen years into their armed forces. In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of fifteen years but who have not attained the age of eighteen years, States Parties shall endeavour to give priority to those who are oldest

4. In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict (UNCRC, 1989).

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 12

while upholding the provisions of the UNCRC (1989). On the other hand, it is arguable that

the UNCRC (1989) is a universal document, and was intended to remain as a general

guideline for each country who is a party to its ratification to have the flexibility to determine

its own specific age minimum, based on its own understanding of its particular context.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNHR) (1948) is a document that confers and

entitles fundamental rights, regardless of their caste, sex, creed, age, etc. (www.un.org) on all.

It focuses on a healthy environment and tried to ensure that each human being is treated with

respect, dignity, protection and humanity. A discussed above in the context of this essay:

a) Article 3 (footnote 2);

b) Article 4 (footnote 3) and

c) Article 5 (footnote 4) will be taken into account.

In the situation of the child soldiers in Uganda it seems all these fundamental rights have

been violated. From the time of their abduction, their liberty, security and wellbeing are all

violated.

While the above document focuses on the importance of context and environment, Archard

(forthcoming) explores the debate from a philosophical and moral perspective

(http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-children/) and while it is beyond the scope of this

essay to examine all aspects here, however, it is important to note briefly why child’s rights

must be understood. As Freeman (2007:7-8) notes, “rights are important because those who

have them can exercise agency” they “are invisible and inter-dependent” and thus “denying

certain rights undermines other rights”. As part of this moral and ethical debate on the

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 13

relationship between agency, rights and choices, Archard, takes a more philosophical

approach and disagrees with Freeman (2007). He argues that “it is not obvious that children

do have the basic human rights that adults have. Central amongst these rights is that of self-

determination, that is the right to make choices in respect of one's own life” (Archard,

forthcoming URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-children) and he says children do

not have that choice, even in normal situations, let alone where they are in danger. He thus

makes the point from a philosophical point of view, that children do not have the same

starting point as adults when it comes to rights, and therefore to speak about them as having

rights which have been taken away is actually not correct, as in reality they never had them in

the first place. He argues for looking at child rights from a child’s point of view, rather than

an adult’s point of view which is in keeping with the sociology of childhood perspective.

The sociology of childhood is thus a better way of approaching the issue of child rights, as

there are many complex issues at stake.

Section Three:

The utility and shortcomings of these policy documents as a framework for understanding the

context and challenges of children soldiers in Uganda.

The previous section compared two policy documents and highlighted relevant aspects. The

next section examines what a strict versus a re-contextualised application of the polices

would mean in the context of understanding the rights of the child soldiers in Northern

Uganda

a) a strict application of the policy documents

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 14

Both the UNCRC (1989) and ACRWC (1999) seek to uphold and protect the rights of

children, but it appears that in some cases the children themselves choose to relinquish these

rights in order to protect themselves as Boyden (2003) mentioned above. Despite making this

choice, a child in many cases, continues to remain insecure. The point is this, if a child’s

rights are taken away, or if he chooses to give them up and the outcome of either is that the

child is in danger, it is irrelevant how it happened. In both situations, the child has been

completely dehumanised and stripped of all rights. It is thus vital and paramount to ensure

that every child has the basic right to rights at all times, and this is upheld and protected, at

any cost and irrespective of context. This arguably means applying rights policy documents

as strictly as possible.

However, as Rosen (2005) noted, most of the articles in the UNCRC (1989) have been

violated and thus it appears that while activists can argue for strict application of basic rights,

a more nuanced view of war and the context of childhood is needed. Indeed, according to

him, treaties, and policy documents are mere pacifiers, and in reality fail to address any real

issues or give justice to the real victims. He explains the situation is complex because of

competing priorities humanitarian and political, and when these are intertwined and

manipulated, the realities of the children’s issues and contexts are often forgotten.

What if the ACRWC were to be strictly applied? It is true that in the context of the children

soldiers in Uganda, the ACRWC (1999) is a more applicable document than the UNCRC

(1989) as it highlights the gravity of their involvement in the LRA not just as a violation of

their rights, but also as a neglect of their responsibilities towards their elders, family and

community. But a strict application is problematic. The children’s involvement in the LRA, if

forced, is a violation of their rights and also a forced abdication of their responsibility. If

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 15

joining the LRA by the child was made out of self preservation, it is also an abdication of

his/her cultural, communal and familial values which makes it incumbent on them to give

their family priority and put themselves as second. The psychological impact and burden of

this is more complex as a child and his/her family struggle to understand the new dynamic

within the context of broken families, war, economic hardship, eroded values and customs

and a total breakdown of society. The child could be accused of being guilty of abdicating

his/her rights towards his/her family, even though s/he could argue s/he was under duress to

do so. The strictest application of the ACRWC is thus problematic because it is unfair to hold

children responsible for the crimes they committed under duress, as well as their abdication

of values and responsibilities, without consideration of other relevant factors. Thus a more

sensitive approach, which focuses on the voice of the child, is needed.

Another example of where strict application may not always be possible is where a

government may decide not to prioritise children’s rights and welfare during a period of war

may decide that the focus ought to be national security, political stability and economic

progress. There are suggestions that this is what happened in Uganda, and while children’s

rights might fit into the overall framework of security, these may not be specifically

addressed because of other competing factors. So, while activists for the UNCRC and

ACRWC may argue for child rights as a priority this may not always be possible. However, if

the sociology of childhood were adopted as a framework, the voice of the child and his needs

would be placed at the forefront, and not as a competing minority priority.

Another reason that the ACRWC and UNCRC may not be applied strictly, is that these policy

documents are arguably, based on western conceptions of how children ought to be treated,

and this may not be universally applicable eg to Northern Uganda. For instance, Archard

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 16

(1993:63) points out that, what is acceptable and moral in one society may be perceived

unacceptable and immoral in another, and as Boyden and Mann (2005) note even within the

same society, there may be several differences. Thus strict application of these documents

may not always be beneficial to children because their contextual needs may be very

different. Arguably, the ACRWC has a more relevant conception, but, as this essay has tried

to show, understanding child rights requires a proper understanding of the child, in his

context, and his particular experiences.

The above argument leads on to the next question; if the strictest application of universally

(UNCRC, 1989) or continentally (ACRWC, 1999) accepted policies is problematic, what

framework can be used to understand and protect the rights of child soldiers in Uganda,

keeping in mind the importance of the sociology of childhood approach? The next section

proposes a solution.

Re-contextualisation of the policies in keeping with the sociology of childhood

As shown above, it is important to note that it is not always possible and is sometimes

problematic to apply the UNHR (1948), ACRWC (1999) and UNCRC (1989) very strictly.

Thus, when applying these policies to the children of Northern Uganda, it would be a mistake

to say one size fits all, and instead, this essay argues for a more contextually and culturally

sensitive approach to be taken, where re-framing and re-contextualisation occurs, through the

lens of the sociology of childhood, as explained in section one, above.

This contextual and specific understanding of the child soldiers and their rights is important

because, when trying to assist the children, their contextual, cultural and specific needs and

the realities of their plight are kept at the forefront. Consequently the chances of successfully

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 17

rehabilitating and re-integrating them into society are greater. Indeed as pointed out, the

sociology of childhood places the child at the focus of the discourse and this allows a better

and more comprehensive picture of the challenges and specific needs of the children.

Rights are inextricably intertwined and there are thus many complex contextual,

psychological and sociological issues at stake for children and as Boyden and Mann (2005:4)

point out that while “the relevance of many traditional prescriptions for protecting children,

especially interventions imposed from outside the child’s social and cultural context” are

being questioned, “new insights and ideas that could be more helpful have not been widely

disseminated or evaluated” have been overlooked. They thus advocate for a balanced

approach to help understand children and their rights, and say that the starting point ought to

be the children themselves. Indeed, Boyden and Mann (2005:19) believe that failing to take

into account a child’s views can lead to inappropriate interventions and may even worsen the

situation.

It is clear that child soldiers not only need extra protection but they ought to be consulted

when trying to help them so that appropriate and relevant solutions to problems can be found.

This approach recognises that children are not just voiceless recipients but are capable of

contributing to decisions about their lives. In this sense they are assets as potential,

participating competent social actors. This approach calls for working “with” children rather

than “for” them, and understanding and consulting them about their needs and rights in

relation to their specific context and experiences.

The current debates around child rights and notions of childhood focus around the necessity

to understand the issues and support children with a better understanding of their personal

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 18

traits and context. Indeed as Boyden and Mann (2005:4) point out, “many notions of

childhood and of childhood vulnerability, development, and well-being are contextually

constructed” and these need to be understood as such, and not from outside the context. They

go on to question “the relevance of many traditional prescriptions for protecting children,

especially interventions imposed from outside” (2005:4). By this they mean that while

universally accepted policies and approaches to uphold child rights and protect children

maybe generally applicable, they need to be re-contextualised and understood from the

perspective of the child in his own specific context i.e. the sociology of childhood, where

they are constructed, in order to be effective.

Conclusion

At present, there are attempts being made to rehabilitate and reintegrate the ex-child soldiers. 

This is a challenge because often the child soldiers had killed, looted and maimed their own

villages. While the GoU has allocated budget support towards the rebuilding process, it is

according to many not enough (http://kabiza.com/War-Northern-Uganda-LRA.htm). The

efforts, issues and consequences are beyond the scope of this essay and involves research on

economic, social and political considerations from the child’s perspective.

This essay examined the sociology of childhood and argued it is a useful framework for

examining child soldier’s rights in Uganda. It examined the UNHR, UNCRC and ACWRC. It

argued that in order to have a better understanding of the rights of children and “for

interventions to effectively address the actual needs and concerns of children” context

specific information must be based on “sound theory and appropriate empirical evidence”

(Boyden and Mann, 2005:20). It highlighted the importance of looking at the actual

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 19

historical, geographical, socio-economic, cultural and personal issues when examining the

rights of children. It recommended that children’s rights must be examined in their own

environment and within their own contexts and suggested the sociology of childhood as one

possible lens and framework to achieve this.

Final Word Count: 5366

References

African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 20

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from www.africa-union.org (accessed 10th February, 2010)

Alfredson , L. (2002) Child soldiers, displacement and human security London: Child

Soldiers

Archard, D. (1993). 2nd (Eds.). Children Rights and Childhood Routledge: Oxon

Archard, David William, "Children's Rights", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

(Summer 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL =

<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/rights-children/>.

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from (www.crin.org) (date accessed 15th April, 2011)

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from http://www2.invisiblechildren.com (date accessed 20th April, 2011)

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from http://kabiza.com/War-Northern-Uganda-LRA.htm (date accessed 12th April,

2011)

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from http://www.unicef.org/esaro/children_youth_5930.html (date accessed 12th

April, 2011)

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 21

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from http://www.worldvision.org/content.nsf (date accessed 20th April, 2011)

Boyden, J. (2003) ‘The Moral Development of Child Soldiers: What Do Adults Have to

Fear?’ in Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology Vol. 9 No. 4 pp. 343-362

Boyden, J., and de Berry, J. (eds) (2004) Children and youth on the front line: ethnography,

armed conflict and displacement. Oxford: Berghahn Books.

Boyden, J. and Mann, G. (2005) Children’s Risk, Resilience, and Coping in Extreme

Situations

Brett, R. and McCallin, M. (1998) Children the Invisible Soldiers Sweden: Save the Children

Brett, R. and Specht, I. (2004) Young Soldiers: Why they Choose to Fight USA: International

Labour Organization

Freeman, M. (2007). Why it Remains Important to Take Children’s Rights Seriously.

International Journal of Children’s Rights 15 pp. 5-23

Human Rights Watch (2003) Stolen Children: Abduction and Recruitment in Northern

Uganda New York: Human Rights Watch

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 22

Mayall, B. (2000) 'The sociology of childhood in relation to children's rights' in International

Journal of Children's Rights , Vol.8 no.3, pp.243-58  

Mayall, B. (2004) 'The sociologies of childhood’ in Developments in Sociology, Vol.20,

pp.37-57

Rosen, D.(2005) Armies of the Young: Child Soldiers in War and Terrorism USA: Rutgers

University Press

Tefferi, H. (2008) Reconstructing Adolescence After Displacement: Experience from Eastern

Africa in Hart, (J). (eds) (2008) Years of Conflict: Adolescence, Political Violence and

Displacement. Oxford: Berghan Books.

United Nations Human Rights

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from www.un.org (accessed 8th July, 2010)

UNICEF

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from http://www.unicef.org (accessed 4th June, 2010)

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 23

UNICEF

Bibliographical Note. Online.

Available from http://www.unicef.org/crc (accessed 10th April, 2011)

United Nations 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child

Wessells, M. (2005) ‘Child Soldiers, Peace Education, and Postconflict Reconstruction for

Peace’ in Theory into Practice Vol. 44, No. 4 pp. 363-369

Farhana Zaveri - ZAV09076869 24