Commentary of Non-Governmental Organizations
to the responses of the government of the Russian Federation (RF) to the questions of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, which are to be discussed in connection with the review of the second State periodic report of the RF on the implementation of the Convention on the rights of the child.

Introductory notes

In 1989, the International Convention on the Rights of the Child was passed by the United Nations. In 1990, the USSR joined the convention. In 1992, as the legal successor to the USSR, the RF presented the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (further referred to as the Committee) its first State periodic report devoted to the observance of the rights of children (According to the rules of the committee, these reports are presented every five years). In 1998, The RF presented the Committee its second State periodic report on the RF's implementation of the Convention on the Right's of the Child from 1993-1997. According to the Committee's rules, non-governmental organizations of the Convention's member countries can also submit their views in the form of commentaries to the main government report. Thus, in October 1998 a coalition of 11 Russian non-governmental organizations submitted an alternative report, which was officially presented at the Committee's preliminary meeting in Geneva on February 2, 1999. In the spring of 1999, following a review of the official and the alternative reports and in preparation for the main meeting, scheduled to take place on September 23, 1999, the Committee sent the Russian government 35 additional questions regarding the more critical problems facing children in Russia. Related ministries and government departments presented their responses to those questions in an 80 page document which we received in the first week of September. The following commentary, like the alternative report, is based on the principle of commenting on the official government document.

Boris Altshuler Program Director "Right of the child"

Anatoly Severny President of the Independent Association of Child Psychiatrists and Psycholigists

September 10, 1999

General measures of implementation
(Articles 4, 42, and 44)

Question No. 1
In light of the information provided in paragraph 36 of the report, please provide additional information on the areas in which the reviews of legislation carried out in 1995 and 1997 identified a further need to review legislation. In connection with the earlier recommendation of the Committee (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 17), please explain how the new legislative measures are implemented and indicate the major problems and difficulties experienced in their implementation.

Excerpt from the Government Response

...The fundamental law in this sphere is the Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors" (accepted in June 1999) which contains legal and social guarantees to ensure the protection of rights and legal interests, and security of minors and creates a legal base for the implementation of programs for the health of society...

Alternative Commentary
Unfortunately, the current legislation doesn't really offer any guarantees that children's rights will be protected. The Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors" demonstrates this clearly. Since the government refers to this law on numerous occasions in its responses, it is worth looking at it more closely. This law creates almost no new mechanisms for protecting the rights of minors. It only pinpoints the current situation, which as indicated in the government's response, is characterized by a general violation of the rights of children in practically all areas of life. In no way is the law directed at "preventing neglect and violations against minors." Rather it simply demonstrates the latest government attempt to reduce the consequences of its policies, which have been destructive for children. The law doesn't create any "system for prevention," since the very concept of a system is missing from the law as are mechanisms for the real cooperation among various disunited agencies and institutions. The law celebrates the principle of distribution of responsibility for the welfare of children, which in practice removes that responsibility from various government departments. The law fails to recognize the role of public associations and other non-governmental structures in the resolution of the problems declared to exist in the law, including control over the activities of government bodies and institutions. The law also admits the lack of control and the irresponsibility of psychological, medical and pedogogical commissions (???) which have destroyed the lives of tens of thousands of children by labeling them as mentally disabled on the basis of improperly determined diagnoses, which aren't subsequently re-examined.

As was mentioned in the alternative report, the law cited in the government's report "On the foundations of guaranteeing the rights of children in the Russian Federation" is really just a declaration since it doesn't propose any concrete mechanisms for guaranteeing children's rights.

The introduction in the summer of 1998 of legislation to monitor the rights of adopted children (which the government considers in its report to be serious achievement) is, in our opinion, legal nonsense, since an adopted child is on the same footing as a biological child who is no less in need of a mechanism guaranteeing that his/her rights will be respected. The adopting family needs, first of all, professional, social, and psychological assistance. However, a system for providing this assistance does not exist in Russia today. In addition, the introduction of special controls by agencies of child welfare over adopting families puts those families in a particularly risky situation. As happens quite frequently in Russia, this practice could result in information about the adoption being made public, which violates article 139 of the Family Code of the RF and is considered to be a criminal offense under article 155 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The creation of contradictory legal norms serves to repress the adopting parents and is thus directed at the very institution of adoption.

Question No. 2
With regard to paragraph 44 of the report, please provide additional information on the role and effectiveness of the Commissioner for Human Rights, and on the adequacy of its current structures to deal with child rights. Please provide additional information also on the possibility of establishing the position of a federal ombudsman for children to provide independent monitoring and review of the implementation of the Convention.

Excerpt from the Government Response

...The Ombudsman for Human Rights in the RF appealed to the Russian Government on July 7, 1999 with a letter entitled "On saving neglected children and protecting their rights." In that letter he qualified as a national catastrophe the fact that there are millions of neglected children in Russia and recommended the formation of a government commission to take urgent measures. The government agreed with this recommendation: the commission, headed by First Vice-Prime Minister V. Matvienko has been created. (Further the letter of the Ombudsman for Human Rights in the Russian Federation is attached. In it, the Ombudsman writes, in particular, about the need for the introduction of (???), expresses his support for the establishing the position of Ombudsman of children's rights in the RF.

Alternative Commentary
While welcoming the words from the government's response that it is necessary "...to develop legislative suggestions for a mechanism of independent control over the observation of the rights of children," we nonetheless draw attention to the fact that up until now, no measures have been taken in that direction, and there has likewise been no response to our suggestion (which was offered on June 24, 1999 at a meeting of the interdepartmental commission for the coordination of work on the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Universal Declaration on ensuring the survival, defense and development of children) to create a working group with the participation of human rights activists to develop such suggestions.

In addition, the Ombudsman for Human Rights, despite his growing apparatus over the past year and a half, has yet to create a structure which would be responsible for the defense of the rights of children. The Ombudsman has not invoked his right of legislative initiative as regards the creation of juvenile justice nor as regards the creation of the position of Ombudsman of children's rights in Russia.

Question No. 3 Regarding the earlier recommendation by the Committee (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 17), please provide further information about the mandate, role, powers, and functioning of the coordinating bodies described in paragraph 43 of the report, and specifically on the relationship between the Coordinating Committee set up to monitor implementation of the Convention and the other interdepartmental bodies mentioned in the report.

Excerpt from the Government Response

An inter-departmental commission for the coordination of work connected with Russia's implementation of the UN Convention on the rights of the child and the Universal Declaration on ensuring the survival, protection and development of children analyzes the course of the fulfillment of the indicated international documents and prepares suggestions for their implementation. It also offers suggestions to the Russian government on improving children's lives and coordinates the activities of federal agencies of the executive authorities of subjects of the RF for improving the plight of children... Decisions of this commission, made in correspondence with its legal authority, are obligatory for all executive bodies represented in the commission.

The Russian government's inter-departmental commission for minors was created to ensure a unified government approach to the problems of preventing neglect and violations against children, and the protection of their rights and legal interests... Decisions of this commission, made in correspondence with its legal authority, are likewise obligatory for all executive bodies represented in the commission.

Alternative Commentary
The coordinating agencies, including the interdepartmental commission, indicated in the government's document, in practice don't in any way influence the departments, whose representatives attend the commission's meetings. The public is unaware of any real results of the work of those agencies and the government's response does not shed any light on this matter.

Question No. 5
Please provide further information on the involvement of NGOs in the implementation of the rights of the child and of the Committee's earlier recommendations, and on the support provided to NGOs to promote their involvement and cooperation with the government, as recommended by the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 17)

Excerpt from the Government Response

Government policies promote the activities of acting non-governmental and non profit organizations in the their efforts to protect children's rights.

Alternative Commentary

The government's response doesn't get to the heart of the question posed by the Committee regarding the participation of non-governmental organizations in the protection of children's rights and in the fulfillment of the Committee's recommendations in Russia. The government's policy has been geared toward the isolation of the public from this sphere of activity. In particular, the law on social orders still has not been passed as a result of which non-governmental organizations are deprived of systematic support from the government in areas such as the protection of children's rights, the social rehabilitation of children, etc. The law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors" is evidence of this fact.

Question No. 6.
In relation to the annual reports mentioned in paragraph 45 of the report, please provide additional information on the conclusions reached, and main proposals for improvement contained in the last annual report to be prepared on the situation of children in the Russian Federation, and on the implementation of such proposals. Please indicate if these annual reports have ever been considered by Parliament.

Excerpt from the Government Response

...Annual State reports on children in the RF are regularly sent to the State Duma and the Federal Assembly of the RF...

Alternative Commentary
It is necessary to add that the annual state reports on the children in the Russian Federation have never been discussed by the parliament.

Question No. 7
In connection with the positive aspect noted by the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add. 4, para. 3), please provide further information on the measures taken to develop training of professionals, and on the impact of the measures taken to disseminate information about the provisions of the Convention (described in paragraphs 65-68 of the report) among children, parents, and professionals working with and for children. Excerpt from the Government Response ...Unfortunately, its isn't possible to say that efforts to disseminate information on the regulations of the Convention on the rights of the child among children, parents, and professionals have been satisfactory... In educational institutions, there isn't a special course on human rights. Many teachers don't have the training to teach such a course.

Alternative Commentary
At the level of the state, there have yet to be any efforts to undertake a mass dissemination of the Convention and other similar international documents so that they are accessible to each family. We can only hope that the intentions stated in the government's response will be realized in the time prior to the next presentation of the State periodic report to the Committee in 2003.

General principles (Articles 2, 3, 6, and 12)

Question No. 10
In light of the information provided in paragraph 116 of the report, please indicate if any studies have been carried out on the causes of the rapid increase in the suicide and murder rates of children. With regard to the description in paragraph 117 of the report, please provide also additional information on measures taken to prevent suicide and provide additional psychological and crisis support to children in connection to the growing suicide and murder rates.

Excerpt from the Government Response
At present, there are over 500 educational institutions for children needing psychological, educational, medical and social assistance which have been created and function as part of the system of education of the RF. Within this system a crisis center and telephone hotline have been organized to offer psychological assistance by telephone to children who find themselves in crisis situations, including those who have been subjected to violence or have suicidal tendencies... As part of the social welfare system, centers have been created which offer urgent psychological support to children and teenagers who find themselves in stressful situations or are contemplating suicidal... In addition, there are centers, working as part of the system of committees for youths, which offer urgent psychological assistance by telephone.

Alternative Commentary
At the government level, systemic efforts to create specialized services for the prevention of suicidal behavior among minors, the prevention of repeat suicide attempts have not been undertaken, and professional personnel specializing on these problems are not being trained, even in those crisis centers which have already been created.

Question No. 11
In connection with paragraphs 285-292 of the report, please provide additional information on the effectiveness of measures taken to protect children living in families with incomes below the subsistence level, as provided by article 27 of the Convention. Please indicate if any measures are planned to protect the assistance described from the impact of budgetary austerity measures required by the financial crisis of August 1998.

Excerpt from the Government Response
In offering assistance, efforts are being made to more effectively determine the needs of the recipients of that assistance.

Alternative Commentary
The government's response makes no mention of the fact that children's benefits have not been paid for many months, a fact which has created a problem of national proportions.

Civil rights and freedoms (Articles 7-8, 13-17 and 37(a))

Question No. 13
Regarding the prohibition of any type of punishment intended to cause suffering or degradation (as described in paragraph 162 of the report), please indicate if any measures have been planned or implemented so as to enforce respect for the relevant legislation, and in particular within boarding institutions for children deprived of parental care, in those where juvenile offenders are deprived of liberty, and in the context of police investigations. In view of the 1996 recommendations of the UN Committee Against Torture (A/52/44, paras. 42(c) and 43(d)), please indicate if any measures have been taken in connection with the lack of effective machinery to inspect conditions and to facilitate and address promptly any complaints.

Excerpt from the Government Response
There exists in the RF a system of prosecutors' offices, which have the duty of overseeing the observation of the rights of citizens who are imprisoned, during the period of police investigation as well as in boarding institutions for children and in other institutions. Such a monitoring function has also been designated to the Ombudsman for Human Rights in the RF. In 1998-1999, he visited several prisons and boarding institutions for children. Those visits revealed cases where human dignity was degraded and criminal cases were opened in connection with those violations... The protection of the rights of children is carried out by parents (or guardians) and, in those instances outlined in the Family Code, by child welfare agencies, the prosecutor's office and the courts. Minors who have been determined in accordance with the law to be completely capable of functioning independently have the right to exercise their own rights and responsibilities, including the right to protection, even before they have become legal adults. Agency officials and other citizens who become aware that a child's life or health is in danger, or that his/her rights and legal interests have been violated are obliged to notify the child welfare agencies in the municipality where the child happens to be. Upon receiving such notification, the child welfare agency is required to take the necessary measures to protect the rights and legal interests of the child... The prosecutor's office of the subjects of the RF systematically monitor the adherence of the activities of boarding homes for children and other children's institutions to the law. Based on the results of this monitoring, measures are taken to restore any rights that may have been violated, including the personal, property, housing rights as well as rights to medical care. In 1998 alone, the prosecutor's offices' inspections of these institutions revealed 2139 violations of the law and 108 unlawful legal acts. In connection with these violations, criminal cases were launched against more than 200 officials...

The conditions in juvenile detention centers have been evaluated as unsatisfactory and criminal cases have been launched in this regard.

Alternative Commentary
The tragic truth of the Russian reality shows on a daily basis that the prosecutor's offices monitoring efforts are not sufficient as they cannot protect children who have been deprived of their parents' care from cruel or degrading treatment in boarding institutions for children, in detention centers or during police investigations. This is also true of child welfare agencies. In addition to the prosecutor's offices, those departments and ministries to which children's institutions belong are also authorized to monitor children's rights. Naturally, such control cannot be effective and there are plenty of examples to prove this, including those revealed by prosecutor's offices. Government departments do everything in their power to prevent public control over their activities. There aren't any mechanisms which allow minors in boarding institutions to address violations of their rights. Clearly, those children with the least rights are those in boarding institutions for mentally disabled children, in particular in boarding institutions of the Ministry of Labor and Social Development. The same can be said about those minors in detention centers and in prisons.

Family environment and alternative care (Articles 5, 18 paragraph 1 and 2, 9, 10, 27 paragraph 4, 20, 21, 11, 19, 39 and 25)

Question No. 14
Regarding the recommendations of the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 18) and in connection with the information provided in paragraphs 177-195 of the report, please indicate if any measures have been taken to provide financial and other support, including family counseling and special social assistance, to families so as to prevent the need for action for deprivation of parental rights.

Excerpt from the Government Response
A significant role in the prevention of family problems and the providing counseling to families in critical situations has been given to the system of social services for families and children, which for Russia is a relatively new social welfare institution whose formation began in 1993. As of the beginning of 1999, there were 2133 institutions throughout Russia in the social welfare system, including 655 specialized institutions for minors in need of social rehabilitation, 370 rehabilitation centers for children and teenagers with disabilities.

Alternative Commentary
The generalized government response (of which we have cited only a small portion) is typical of the entire 80-page document, which was written like a teaching guide for, as the authors of the responses seem to think, the relatively unqualified members of the Committee. In the response to question no. 14, the authors describe an ideal situation which unfortunately has no relation to the current Russian reality. While reading the part of the government's response on "departments for day visits of children from needy families where they are provided with free, hot meals," you can't help but to recall the many cases of children fainting as a result of being deprived of school meals following the financial crisis of August 17, 1998. Likewise, the "information" provided in the government responses about the supposed "work with families raising children with disabilities" does not withstand any criticism.

The deprivation and limitation of parental rights remains the principle method of influencing needy families. That is one of the reasons for the continual growth in the number of children who have been deprived of families (In the last five years, the number of children taken away from their families has increased 1.5 times). The government response doesn't provide any concrete examples or information about the effectiveness of social institutions in terms of helping parents avoid losing their parental rights. At the same time, statistics indicate an annual increase in the number of families where parents have been deprived of their parental rights or have had these rights limited (the past five years has shown an 87% increase in the number of law suits which have resulted in the deprivation of parental rights).

The catastrophic increase in child neglect is indicative of the lack of counseling of problem families. For effective rehabilitation, it is necessary to coordinate the efforts of a wide range of specialists working in various departments. This is not at all possible given the traditional division of responsibility for children, a situation which was mentioned in greater detail in the alternative report.

Question No. 16
In light of paragraphs 211-219 of the report and the provisions of article 21 of the Convention, please provide additional information on the remaining changes required to provide appropriate procedures to regulate adoption and in particular intercountry adoption. Please indicate the prerequisites that must be fulfilled to make children available for adoption and whether children for whom an action for deprivation of parental rights has been successful are considered to be adoptable. Please indicate if there are any plans to accede to the 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect to Intercountry Adoption.

Excerpt from the Government Response
On July 1, 1998, the Federal Law from June 27, 1998 "On the introduction of changes and amendments to the Family Code of the RF" came into force and regulates a series of issues in the sphere of international adoption of children. In particular, this law obliges the RF to develop and confirm the procedure by which agencies and organizations of foreign states can adopt children in the RF and the procedure by which this process is controlled... International adoption has been on the rise (it has increased 72% in the past three years) and internal adoption have been on the decline. This has lead to a tendency to create more favorable conditions for international adopters.

Alternative Commentary
The government's response accurately indicates the persistent decline in getting children who have been deprived of parental guidance placed in new families within Russia. However, the reason behind this phenomenon is missing from the report. It is related to the fact that government institutions are not interested in the placing orphans in families. Rather, they are interested in increasing the number of children in children's boarding institutions primarily because the financial, material and personnel support accorded to those institutions is based on the number of children living there rather than on the progress made by these institutions in placing orphans with host families. Government officials generally explain the low level of adoption within Russia by the fact that there are few Russians interested in adopting children. This invalid thesis is refuted by the example of the Samara region where, as a result of structural changes in the child welfare department, the number of orphans being placed in families has increased significantly.

Question No. 17
Regarding the earlier recommendation of the Committee (CRC/C/15/Add. 4, para. 19), please provide additional information on the placement of children deprived of their family environment in foster care. Please include information on the number of children in foster care, the number usually placed with each foster family, length of stay with foster families and any information on difficulties and problems encountered by fostered children. In the light of paragraph 220 of the report, please indicate the type of problems reported by the child-care authorities as a result of the twice yearly checks on the living conditions and education of fostered children; please provide information on the type of support services (financial, counseling, etc) provided to foster families.

Excerpt from the Government Response
At present, of the annual number of children left without the care of their parents, 30% are placed in children's institutions while 70% are placed with foster families.

For the moment an increase in the number of foster families is being held back, first and foremost, by the local government's lack of financial resources to assist them and by the lack of development of specialized services among child care agencies which could offer professional support to these families.

Alternative Commentary
The figures presented above are evidence of the yearly decrease in the number of officially declared orphans who are placed in foster families (61% in 1998 versus 69% in 1996 and 78% in 1992). In their response, the government fails to indicate that the vast majority of families which adopt or foster orphans are the immediate relatives of these children. Thus, the fact that 61% of orphans who are placed in foster families doesn't really illustrate the effectiveness of the government's system for placing children into foster families.

The claim that local government's lack of financial resources has an effect on developing foster care is in theory inaccurate since those same administrations spend significantly more money on keeping children in institutions than on placing them in families. As we have said before, the real problem lies in the fact that the government does not wish to give to foster families funds which are instead spent to maintain huge, economically ineffective boarding institutions which have disastrous consequences on the children's development. The Samara region, where, thanks to involvement of the local authorities, the number of foster families has risen significantly over the past few years, is a good example of the possibilities of foster care given the current reality. On the other hand, in certain cities, such as Moscow, the authorities have made attempts to do away with foster care. In these places, nothing is being done at the government level to professionally prepare foster families to take in children. It is not coincidental that the government chose in its response to avoid the Committee's question about the effectiveness of government child welfare agencies to inspect the welfare of children in foster families.

Question No. 18
In the light of paragraph 220 of the report and of the Committee's recommendations (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 19), please provide additional information on the inspections carried out by the child-care authorities of institutions hosting children deprived of parental care. Please provide information regarding the regulations governing the scope and extent of such inspections, their frequency, results and if adequate provision is made to facilitate complaints by children living in such institutions. Please indicate if unannounced inspections by independent monitors are allowed.

Excerpt from the Government Response
Child welfare agencies are obliged to monitor the rights and legal interests of children who are living in children's institutions in their municipality... These agencies are required to provide assistance in reviewing complaints from children living in the institutions. In correspondence with the Federal Law "On the principle guarantees of the rights of children in the RF," public associations and other non profit organizations as well as representative offices of international organizations... have the right to contest in a court of law violations of the rights of children on the part of officials of government agencies and institutions, parents (or guardians), pedagogical, medical or social workers as well as other specialists who work with children.

Alternative Commentary
From the government's response it becomes clear that there is no independent control "without preliminary notification" over the monitoring of the rights of institutionalized children in institutions. As for the participation of public associations in the protection of the rights of institutionalized children, the material included in the government's response does not in any way correspond with reality and was included in an attempt to mislead the Committee and the international community. At the same time, the government doesn't provide any concrete information in its response about the effectiveness of the child welfare agencies in monitoring the rights of institutionalized children.

Question No. 19
Please indicate if the placement of children in institutions (or foster care) is subject to review and the frequency and procedures used for such review. Please indicate how the views of the child are considered during procedures to review placement of children deprived of parental care in accordance with the provisions of articles 25 and 12 of the Convention.

Excerpt from the Government Response
...If it is in the interest of the child, then the decision is reviewed in accordance with article 57 of the Family Code of the RF. The views of the child are taken into consideration in his/her placement with a family and it is required to take into consideration the viewpoint of children age 10 or over.

Alternative Commentary
In its response, the government ignores the Committee's question about "whether or not the decision to place a child in an institution is reviewed" and no examples are provided regarding the actual functioning of the review process.

Question No. 20
With regard to the information provided in paragraphs 226-231 of the report and in light of the recommendations formulated by the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 19), please provide additional information on cases of domestic violence and on child neglect and abuse, including sexual abuse, within the family and within institutions. Please indicate if the draft legislation described in paragraph 229 will introduce the principle of mandatory reporting for professionals suspecting cases of abuse, and if any measures are planned to increase public awareness and to provide training for professionals working with children on the detection and treatment of child abuse.

Excerpt from the Government Response
...The Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors" sets out the requirement of children's agencies and institutions not only to protect minors from all forms of discrimination, physical and psychological abuse, insults, sexual or psychological exploitation, but also to immediately inform the prosecutor's office about such cases.

Alternative Commentary
The response of the government completely leaves out the request of the Committee "to provide additional information on cases of domestic violence and on child neglect and abuse, including sexual abuse, within the family and within institutions." We would like to note that unfortunately nowhere in Russia is any effort being made to train professionals to deal with cases of child abuse and to provide assistance to children in crisis situations. The Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors" while declaring the obligation of officials to inform the prosecutor's office about cases of child abuse and other violations of children's rights, doesn't set out any concrete mechanisms of liability for not observing those norms.

Basic health and welfare (Articles 6, paragraph 2; 23, 24, 26, 27, and 18, paragraph 3, and 27 paragraphs 1-3)

Question No. 21
With regard to the concern expressed by the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 9) and in relation to the number of children attending remedial classes in general schools, as described in paragraph 238 of the report, please provide additional information regarding the assistance provided to promote the social inclusion of children with moderate disabilities.

Excerpt from the Government Response
In the 1998-1999 academic year, 213,000 students with learning disabilities were in special education classes in general education institutions, while 2,300 were in regular classes at general education schools...

Alternative Commentary
As the figures above indicate, only 1% of children with learning disabilities are placed in regular classes (most likely this is a case of "forced integration" in small town and village schools which have a limited capacity). As of today Russia hasn't reached the stage where it can talk about the implementation of principles of integration in the Russian educational system. On average, for every school in Russia there are only 0.28 special education classes for students with learning disabilities. In addition, it is worth underling the fact that there is no system for training special education teachers, and schools generally don't have any staff members who have specialized in special education which has consequently led to a situation in which the effectiveness of special education classes is extremely low.

Question No. 22
With regard to information provided in paragraphs 236 and 237 of the report, please provide additional information on the rehabilitative treatment and remedial education provided for children with disabilities, including the children living in boarding institutions and the children living in special boarding schools. Please provide detailed information about the staffing of such institutions, including information on the training of staff and on any measures taken to include the provisions of the Convention in the content of such training. Please provide information on measure taken to provide advice and support to parents of children with disabilities so that special education can be provided while minimizing the need for institutionalization, and on measures taken to train medical professionals in the provision of such advice and support to families of children with disabilities.

Excerpt from the Government Response
The majority of children in children's homes and institutions for mental disabilities are those who suffer from (???) and from chronic psychological disorders... One of the main areas of activity of such institutions consists of qualified medical help (treatment, rehabilitation, counseling of specialists, hospitalization of ill children in treatment and rehabilitation centers). In an effort to attain medical and pedagogical correction, rehabilitation and adaptation, the above mentioned institutions have organized medical care, education and job training. Social adaptation of children with learning disabilities is done on the basis of well accepted didactic principles which deal with training and correction. The accent is on social adaption into daily life and on labor rehabilitation (training in the production and service fields) with the subsequent integration into society.

Alternative Commentary
We provided the part of the government's response on mentally disabled children in boarding institutions and homes because the text is in some ways more terrifying than the children's homes themselves. It is terrifying in its open deceptiveness written in the spirit of the worst examples of totalitarian propaganda. We believe that the Minister of Labor and Social Development Sergei Kalashnikov, who is a proponent of preserving the current system of institutions for children with mental disabilities, must bear the responsibility for sending such a text to the Committee. Once again we must reiterate that those facing the worst conditions are children with mental disabilities in the boarding institutions of the Minister of Labor and Social Development's department for veterans and the elderly. In the majority of these boarding institutions, children are deprived of qualified medical assistance, are often incorrectly diagnosed, are not provided with basic conditions for development, correction or rehabilitation. We are aware of mass deaths in these institutions as a result of unqualified care. Children are not able to get necessary operations to correct physical defects with which they were born or acquired later.

As for the Ministry of General and Professional Education's institutions for children with learning disabilities (???) at least 70-80% of them are diagnosed incorrectly which means that they are not subsequently provided with the proper medical and psychological care. (???) Naturally there is a lack of special education for such students since only 10% of teachers have special training in that field. Likewise, social adaptation of teenagers with mental disabilities is a mute point since there is the total absence of any system of post institutional adaptation, of mentoring for those released from the institutions or for the mentally disabled children in the institutions. In the alternative report, we provide statistics which paint a frightening picture of what awaits teenagers when they begin their post-institution life.

Question No. 23
Please indicate if the placement of children with disabilities in institutions is subject to review and the frequency and procedures used for such review. Please provide separate information on the procedure for review of diagnoses of disabilities at different stages of child development. Please indicate how the views of the child are considered during procedures to review placement of children or diagnoses of educational ability, in accordance with the provisions of articles 25 and 12 of the Convention.

Excerpt from the Government Response
...The decision to place a child in an institution for mentally disabled children can be re-examined on the basis of psychological, medical and pedagogical consultations that take into consideration the results of correctional efforts, medical (including in-patient examinations in diagnostic centers and departments) and pedagogical observations of the child's physical and intellectual development... ...There is the possibility and a procedure for reviewing the status of a child having been diagnosed as disabled. It is possible that the child will be declassified as disabled or reclassified more appropriately according to new symptoms which may have occur as a result of certain symptoms lessening with age and development or from effective rehabilitation.

Alternative Commentary
The government has once again avoided a direct answer of the question posed by the Committee - in this case regarding the procedure and frequency of reconsidering the diagnosis of children who have been placed in specialized institutions and regarding the extent to which the viewpoint of the child is taken into consideration in the process. Rather than concrete figures requested by the Committee, the government has responded by describing the procedure by which children are placed in institutions, although it neglects to mention that the decision of the psychological, medical and pedagogical commission almost never reconsiders its decision by increasing the social and educational status of the child. In fact just the opposite is sometimes true. We are aware of cases in which the commission purposely worsened the diagnosis of a child in an institution just as he/she was reaching adulthood, with the goal of having the child committed for life to an institution for mentally disabled adults. Accordingly, the government's response includes information about the procedure for reconsidering disability whereas the Committee was requesting information about a re-evaluation of the diagnosis (which is not at all the same), which as we have mentioned above is in the majority of cases inaccurate to begin with. As for the re-evaluation of the educational capabilities of the child, the medical, psychological, pedagogical commission quite often lowers the educational status of children. We are not aware of a single case in which the status was elevated. The government response doesn't offer any concrete statistics on that matter.

Question No. 24
In light of information provided in paragraphs 258-261 of the report, please provide additional information on the incidence and on efforts undertaken to combat the spread of tuberculosis, and in particular among children living in institutions.

Excerpt from the Government Response
The number if children infected with tuberculosis increased by more than two times from 1991-1998. In just one year from 1997-198 the number increased by 6.6% indicating that 14.4 in 100,000 children were infected with the disease. There are 166 children's hospitals capable of handling 21,000 patients (as of 1998) and treatment and rehabilitation centers for children infected with tuberculosis also function. In 1995, the Federal Law "On the prevention of diseases caused by the HIV virus" was passed. This law guarantees that the government will take upon itself certain measures which include free medical assistance to those infected with HIV and sets out the rights of minors with HIV. The law also provides rights to their parents. A system of epidemiological control has been introduced (approximately 30 million examinations per year are conducted) which make it possible to reveal the HIV/AIDS illness... As of July 16, 1999, there were 532 cases of children under the age of 15 with HIV. In 126 of these cases, the HIV had developed into AIDS and 101 of the children have died. There are 1970 cases of teenagers between the ages of 15-18 (at the time of the diagnosis) with HIV and more than 90% of them became infected in connection with drug use. There have likewise been 175 cases where HIV infected women (in most cases, drug addicts) have given birth.

Alternative Commentary
In our opinion, it would have made more sense for the government in its response to discuss the catastrophic increase of tuberculosis in detention centers for juvenile offenders. It is also necessary to comment on the tragic fate of children who are born with HIV and are subsequently abandoned in the hospital by their mothers. We are aware of cases in which newborn infants, having been refused by their mothers, stay in the hospital for months. In its report, the government cites the Federal Law "On the prevention of diseases caused by the HIV virus" from February 24, 1995 which "stipulates social welfare of HIV infected minors...forbidding any limitation of the rights of those infected with HIV, not allowing them to be refused acceptance into educational institutions, etc." In practice, however, this law functions poorly and families with children infected with HIV or with AIDS find themselves in a severely difficult situation as a result of the absence of a system of special social and psychological support for such families.

Education, leisure and cultural activities (Articles 28, 29, and 31)

Question No. 27
Please provide additional information on the increasing problems faced in maintaining educational infrastructure and in addressing the needs of teachers. Please indicate if there are effective mechanisms to monitor rates of school attendance and school drop-out. In this respect, please provide information on the impact of the new legislation allowing the expulsion of children from school for disciplinary reasons. Please indicate if information is available on the number of such cases and the ages of the children involved, as well as on any measures taken to provide assistance to expelled children so as to reduce their increased vulnerability.

Excerpt from the Government Response
...Observation on the part of the State doesn't include effective mechanisms of control over the level of attendance of classes and the percent of students who drop out of school...According to current legislation, parents and not the schools are responsible for ensuring their children's right to education. In practice this system has lead to an increase in the number of students who have dropped out of school...

Alternative Commentary
It is true that the current law on education has freed the government agencies of education from the responsibility for ensuring that children attend school, although we feel that the government's response places an excessive amount of responsibility on the parents of teenagers who have dropped out of school. The current law, while removing certain responsibilities from the schools has simultaneously given them almost unlimited power in excluding unwanted students from the school. Children and their families are almost without rights when faced with the arbitrariness of school administrations. This is one of the reasons for which at least 10% of school aged children don't attend school and, according to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and prosecutor's office, are making up a feeding ground for the expansion of juvenile crime. All attempts of non-governmental organizations to introduce legislative norms which limit the possibility for excluding children from schools has been met with serious opposition on the part of governmental agencies of education. In the past few years, according to information from the prosecutor's office, there have been cases where even primary school students have been excluded from their schools.

Special protection measures (Articles 22, 30, and 32-40)

Question No. 28
In the light of paragraph 340 of the report, please provide additional information on the gaps in the Russian legislation regarding unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. Regarding paragraph 351 of the report, please provide additional information on measures taken to address the difficulties encountered in providing access to medical and education services for refugee children.

Excerpt from the Government Response
...Within the framework of the federal program "Children of families of refugees and forced migrants" it is only possible to offer assistance to those children who have the status of refugees or forced migrants. Unfortunately, this program does not include migrants who have not obtained the required status. Difficulties in certain regions in the registration of refugees and forced migrants and their ability to obtain the corresponding status has lead in many cases to the children of these families not being allowed to attend schools. Up to the present, there have been certain gaps in the legislation of the RF as concerns the status of migrant children who have arrived without parents (The problem lies in the absence of a mechanism for placing foreign children without parents in families. The problem also lies in the absence of a federal agency of the executive branch of the government which would have the authority to place foreign children with families, resolve issues regarding their education and medical care, defend their rights and legal interests, offer assistance in recovering lost documents, determined their status...) At present, a serious problem is ensuring the rights of children from families of refugees and forced migrants as well as children who have come without parents to medical care and education.

Alternative Commentary
Our position is that migrant children should have the right to medical care and education regardless of their status, registration papers, etc. We fully share the criticism contained in the government's response toward several Russian regions. As for the statement in the government's response regarding the uncertain legal status of children who have arrived in the RF from a foreign country without parents, we must once again refer (as we did in the alternative report) to Article 16 entitled "The citizenship of children whose parents are unknown" of the Federal Law "On citizenship in the Russian Federation" which declares that "a child who is on the territory of the RF and both of whose parents are unknown, is a citizen of the RF..." Thus, the difficulties exposed in the government's response of determining the status of such children is connected with a lack of knowledge and respect of the law.

Question No. 30 In connection with the recommendations formulated by the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add.4, paras. 22 and 23), please provide additional information on the implementation of the new legislation on juvenile justice, as described in paragraphs 411- 26 and 431-432 of the report:
a) please provide additional information on the feasibility of establishing a system of juvenile courts in the near future;
b) please indicate if there are any assessments of the availability and adequacy of legal defense for juvenile offenders, and of the accessibility and effectiveness of the mechanism to handle complaints within the prosecutor's office;
c) with regard to information provided in paragraphs 383 and 427 of the report, please provide additional information on the numbers of children aged 11-13 years brought before the commissions on juvenile affairs, and about the type of compulsory education measures adopted; please include information regarding the length of time for which children of that age can be deprived of liberty through placement in closed educational institutions.
d) Please indicate if recent or planned amnesties have had any significant impact in reducing the number of juvenile offenders deprived of their liberty. Excerpt from the Government Response
a) A draft law on the creation of a system of juvenile courts has already been prepared. Within the framework of an agreement between the Russian government and the Program for the Development of the UN, a new project called "Support for the implementation of legal justice for minors" is being introduced. An experiment to develop elements of juvenile justice and introducing them into judicial and investigative practices is being conducted in 7 intermunicipal courts in Moscow and 3 in St. Petersburg...
b) In accordance with articles 47 and 49 of the Code of Criminal Procedures of the RF, the participation of a defense lawyer in any investigation involving a minor is mandatory. The lawyer becomes involved as soon as the charges are filed. In a case where the minor has been detained or is being held on bail, then the lawyer becomes involved after presenting the corresponding protocol or resolution on (???). Since the passing of the Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors," the human rights functions of the Commission for minors and the protection of their rights have been expanded, a fact which is one of the elements of juvenile justice... In 1998, there were 109,000 (117,500 in 1997) teenagers who committed serious crimes yet whose criminal cases were stopped or never opened because they had yet to reach the legal age for criminal prosecution.
c) On the basis of a decision by the Commission for minors, 1165 children between the ages of 11-13 (1241 in 1997) were sent to special closed correctional institutions...According to the law, teenagers cannot stay in these institutions for more than three years. At the request of the student, the length of the stay can be extended in order to complete one stage of education. The Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors" has for the first time established a procedure by which the court reviews the possibility of placing minors aged 11-18 who have committed serious crimes in special closed correctional institutions. Now the Commission for minors only has the right to petition the court to send the person to such an institution. The decision to send children and teenagers to special closed correctional institutions as well as their release from these institutions can only be made by the court.
d) The State Duma Resolution on the declaration of amnesty No. 4147-II from June 18, 1999 includes minors, who have not previously served time in labor or correctional colonies and who have not yet turned 18 years of age at the time the resolution went into force. The amnesty didn't seem to have a noticeable affect on the number of minors in correctional colonies. Following the amnesty on the basis of the Resolution of the State Duma from March 12, 1997 "On the declaration of amnesty of those individuals having committed serious crimes in connection with the armed conflict in the Chechen Republic" and from the December 24, 1997 Resolution "On the declaration of an amnesty," the number of minors was reduced by 1824 (as of January 1, 1997 there were 21,587 convicted minors in correctional facilities, while as of January 1, 1998, the number had been reduced to 19,763).

Alternative Commentary
a) The first variation of the draft law on the creation in the RF of a system of juvenile courts was already prepared in 1996. However, in three years, none of the individuals with the authority to initiate a bill before the State Duma did so (???).
b) The absence of lawyers for children, which is an essential component of juvenile justice, is undoubted reflected on the quality of the legal assistance provided to children. In addition, in court cases involving children, it is important that there be some legal basis for the mandatory participation of teachers, social workers and psychologists. The expansion of the human rights activities of the Commission for minors, included in the new Federal Law "On the foundations of the system for the prevention of neglect and violations against minors," can only be welcomed. However, as of today it isn't clear how those components of the law will be carried out in practice. Without the creation of a position of Ombudsman for children's rights and public monitoring of children's rights, many of the positive articles of the law are likely to remain on paper only. The practice of releasing juvenile offenders from criminal liability or giving them a punishment that doesn't include imprisonment is certainly a step in the right direction. However, in the absence of effective preventative social work, many juvenile offenders will have little choice other than to return to the streets to criminal activity, drugs, etc.
c) The fact that a teenager can be placed in a special school only following the decision of a court is a step forward. A critical problem remains the shortage of special schools and appropriate social rehabilitation programs, the result of which is that many juvenile offenders remain isolated from society, continue their criminal activities and upon reaching age 14 (when they can be tried for criminal activities) fill up the correctional colonies. At that point, it is almost impossible to break a young person away from the clutches of the criminal world. On the whole, the policy of the government toward juvenile offenders is repressive rather than preventive. The repressive nature of the government's policy has been noted by the Prosecutor General and is evidenced by the correlation of teenagers in special educational institutions (1,500 Should this be 15,000) and those in prison (about 20,000).

Question No. 31
With regard to the statistical data on juvenile justice concerning the type and length of sentences provided in tables 44 and 45 of Annex II of the report, please provide age disaggregated data on the same indicators along the lines of table 43, reflecting the type of punishment and length of sentences involving deprivation of liberty applicable to the different age groups.

Excerpt from the Government Response
...Regarding the length of sentences: in 1999, 2332 (2095 in 1998) teenagers were serving sentences of up to 2 years; 7161 (6680 in 1998) were serving from 2-3 years; 8005 (8705 in 1998) were serving from 3-5 years; 2265 (2624 in 1998) were serving more than 5 years.

Alternative Commentary
We would like to draw your attention to the last figure (2265 sentenced to more than 5 years). Having committed a crime between the ages of 14 and 18, these teenagers are tried as adults and serve their sentences with other teenagers age 14 and older. It is those teenagers who have committed murder, rape, or other serious crimes who are the "teachers" for the coming generation of offenders in the colonies (???).

Question No. 32
Please provide information on the handling of children living and/or working in the streets, including begging children, by municipal authorities. Please indicate how are such children treated when they cannot prove their right to reside in the municipality in which they are found. Please indicate also measures taken or planned to improve services for children living and/or working in the streets.

Excerpt from the Government Response
The authors of the government's response lay out in detail the reasons and sources of child neglect, list the government programs and laws aimed at addressing the problems, repeat that the efforts being undertaken are not sufficient and cite once again the above mentioned letter of the Ombudsman for Human Rights to the Russian government "On saving neglected children and protecting their rights." However, the response doesn't address the direct question of the Committee.

Alternative Commentary
In the absence of a clear response from the government, we would like to note that according to the current procedure, a neglected child found on the street should be brought by a law enforcement officer to a temporary shelter for children (???) where the child can be kept for no more than one month. During that month, the law enforcement agency is responsible for determining whether or not the child was a participant in or a victim of criminal activity, find the child's legal guardian and return the child to that person. If the legal guardian isn't found, the child is placed in a children's shelter or in a children's home. Naturally, these above steps should be accompanied by the medical, psychological, and other rehabilitation of the child. In accordance with the recommendations of the Committee and with international practice, these steps should be taken by a social welfare agency rather than by the police. As a result, there are numerous problems that arise among both the law enforcement agencies and the agencies for social welfare, whose roots lie in interdepartmental disunity and in the departmental distribution of responsibility for children.

The welfare of a child having been at the temporary shelter for children is a problem, first of all for the police. Many children, already the victims of domestic violence, are brought back to their families only to run away again whether to the street, a children's home or elsewhere. This may happen 10-20 times since, as has been mentioned several times already, there is currently no system in place for preventative work (i.e. social and psychological support and correction) with children and teenagers and so-called "risk" families. There is no information as to the effectiveness of those government social centers who supposedly do preventative work. Without any concrete information, the government's response remains yet another declaration without the backing of any factual material. In addition, it is necessary to stress the fact that the main flaw in the government system remains the disunity of various government institutions for prevention and rehabilitation, which means that each department (education, social welfare, health care) creates its own centers, yet whose activities aren't coordinated among one another.

Question No. 33
With regard to the rapid increase in the number of children involved in drug and substance abuse, as described in paragraphs 452-461 of the report and in connection with the concern expressed by the Committee in 1993 (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 15), please indicate if any measures are planned to increase the provision of adequate prevention, treatment and rehabilitation services. Please indicate what treatment is provided to children with a drug addiction when placed in closed special educational establishments for juvenile offenders.

Excerpt from the Government Response
In the version of the government's response that we received, this response was missing.

Alternative Commentary
We must report that the uncoordinated, unsystematic activities of the government agencies dealing with drug addition among children arrived on the scene ten years too late and are completely ineffective. It is worth repeating the conclusions of the alternative report about the necessity to disseminate brochures on a mass scale about drug addiction; about the need to include non-governmental organizations on equal footing with government institutions in drug rehabilitation work; about the repressive nature of the Law "On narcotics and addictive substances (???)."

Question No. 34
In the light of information provided in paragraphs 462-466 of the report and of the earlier recommendation of the Committee (CRC/C/15/Add.4, para. 24), please provide additional information on progress achieved to adopt legislation to protect children from involvement in pornography and prostitution. Please provide additional information on any other measures taken or planned to prevent the sexual exploitation of children, including the need to provide training to medical and law enforcement professionals regarding the handling of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation (including prostitution) so as to avoid further victimization of children. Please indicate if measures have been taken to prepare a comprehensive plan of action taking into a count the recommendations of the 1996 Stockholm World Congress against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children.

Excerpt from the Government Response
The Criminal Code of the RF sets out punishments for crimes committed against minors and involving their sexual exploitation, including rape, sexual abuse, statutory rape, and coercing them into prostitution. Certain norms related to the rights of children to not be exposed to certain information, such as propaganda which causes harm to their health, or their moral and spiritual development are set out in the Federal Law "On the principle guarantees of the rights of children in the RF." Further, the authors of the report describe the system of training and increasing the qualification of personnel: doctors, prosecutors, law enforcement officials, etc. whose position requires that they work with children who have been sexually abused or exploited (including prostitution).

Alternative Commentary
Our commentary to this question comes in the form of an open letter to the Russian President, the Prime Minister, the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Internal Affairs with an appeal to put an end to the unacceptable passivity of Russian law enforcement agencies in combating the sexual exploitation of children, in particular, as concerns the exploitation of hundreds of young boys and teenagers in the city of Novokuibyshevsk (Samara region) for the production of pornographic videos, photos and materials for computers. We would also like to repeat recommendation No. 11 of the final chapter of the alternative report regarding the necessity of passing amendments to article 240 of the Criminal Code of the RF "Exploitation in prostitution" which would set out criminal charges for exploiting minors in prostitution or in the porn business even with their agreement. A minor is not capable of understanding or foreseeing the potential harm of engaging in such activities and his/her "voluntary agreement" should not limit the liability of those who get them involved in that type of activity.

Appendix

September 6, 1999

Addressed to: B. N. Yeltsin, President of the RF V. V. Putin, Prime Minister V. V. Ustinov, Prosecutor General V. B Rushailo, Minister of Internal Affairs

With this letter, we are urging you to devote particular attention to the disturbing problems of the widespread dissemination within Russia of child pornography and other forms of sexual exploitation of minors. The direct reason for this appeal is the scandalous case involving the exploitation of children in Novokuibyshevska (Samara region) in pornographic films and photographs. Over the course of two years more than 300 hours of film and 10,000 photographs were produced. About 400 young boys, aged 7-16, were involved.

In the spring of 1999, the Samara police detained V. F Timofeev, a resident of Novokuibyshevska, who was the main producer of these materials and was also involved in selling drugs and organizing services under the heading "Child for a night." Most disturbing is the fact that Timofeev's activities were well known in the city and he worked quite openly. This raises serious questions as to the attitude of the local law enforcement officers to his activities.

Unfortunately, this case has raised similar questions about other regions of Russia, such as Moscow and St. Petersburg, where there have also been similar arrests. However, instead of combining the criminal cases launched in Samara, Moscow and St. Petersburg and utilizing it to more broadly address the issue of criminal groups with international contacts, the prosecutor's offices are downplaying these cases. In Moscow, one criminal case was broken down into two separate episodes. In the meantime, Timofeev's products are being sold in markets and kiosks in Moscow. D. Kuznetsov, a suspect in Moscow who was released on condition that he not leave the city, continues producing computer versions of his work. Newcomers are continually appearing. The fact that this profitable business is thriving can only be possible given the conscious passivity of law enforcement officers.

It is in particular the absence of attention on the part of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the prosecutor's office to this type of criminal activity which has forced us to appeal to you - the highest leaders of the country.

Sincerely,

Boris Altshuler Program Director, "Right of the child"

Lyubov Kushnir Executive Director

Back