Introduction
In 2024, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child shared a devastating truth: nearly half a billion children are now living in conflict zones (twice as many as in 1990). As wars grow longer and deadlier, children are increasingly the ones who suffer the most as they are caught in conflicts they did not create, victims of atrocities committed with chilling impunity.
The UN Secretary-General reported a 35 percent rise in 2023 in the number of children killed or maimed in armed conflict. More recently, UNICEF estimated that over 50,000 children have been killed or injured in Gaza. These figures hold significant weight. They are the number of broken souls. They were sons and daughters, siblings, students, and dreamers. Each number represents a childhood lost, a future violently ruined before it even had the chance to begin.
No part of the world is spared. And when nearly one in three people on this planet is under 18, the vulnerability of children in war should be more than a side note. It should be a call to urgent, unwavering global action.
There are legal instruments, such as the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, which lays down important principles, and the Rome Statute, governed by the International Criminal Court (ICC), which allows for the prosecution of crimes against children. At the European level, the Lanzarote Convention, was created to combat sexual violence against children but it is rarely used in conflict settings. These legal sources are still crucial but often fail to centre children as full victims. Even when crimes target them directly, their voices are too often left out of the legal process.
But do they efficiently address the situation of children in today’s world? These instruments are often limited in their application during conflict situations, nor do they protect children when they are victims of crimes against humanity. It is evident that when we look at the atrocities unfolding in Gaza, Syria, Sudan, and Ukraine, and this list is far from exhaustive, where children are recruited as soldiers, uprooted from their homes, locked away, and subjected to unspeakable abuse.
Daan Weggemans, ‘NATO: Protecting Children from War Starts with the Arms Trade’ (Leiden Law Blog, 10 July 2024) https://www.leidenlawblog.nl/articles/nato-protecting-children-from-war-starts-with-the-arms-trade accessed 17 July 2025.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998, entered into force 1 July 2002) 2187 UNTS 3.
Council of Europe, Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse(adopted 25 October 2007, entered into force 1 July 2010) CETS No 201.
Human Rights Watch reports that over 40 states now support the inclusion of child-specific protections in the long-overdue international treaty on crimes against humanity. A growing consensus is positively rising and showing that what exists is simply not enough.
As the ICC Prosecutor himself admitted in 2023, children have remained on the margins of international criminal justice. The gaps are not just legal, but they are also procedural. International courts are almost impossible for children to access. And where reparations are granted, they rarely reflect what a child truly needs, such as the time to heal, support to grow, but also the chance to live with dignity.
Now we know, thanks to the efforts of survivors, researchers, and advocates, that children are often targeted because of their youth and vulnerability. It is urgent that procedures be designed with children in mind, by offering protection, dignity, and hope.
That is what truly matters in the proposed convention on crimes against humanity. It is about recognising, finally, what decades of conflict have made painfully clear: there is no real justice if it ignores the youngest victims. The legal imperative is to put children’s rights where they belong: at the core of international law.
Experts’ Proposals for the Future Convention: Toward a Justice That Heals and Prevents
In the light of persistent legal shortcomings, the future International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity marks a decisive opportunity to finally provide an answer to what decades of conflict have made tragically clear: children need stronger and specific protection in times of war.
A powerful coalition of voices has come together. The Coalition for Children and Armed Conflict in the Convention on Crimes Against Humanity, made up of leading human rights and child protection organisations, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Save the Children, the Global Justice Centre, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and many others, has issued concrete recommendations to ensure the new treaty reflects the real and lived vulnerabilities of children in conflict zones, with a focus on crimes against humanity.
Human Rights Watch, ‘Justice for Children in the Future Crimes Against Humanity Treaty’ (21 May 2025) https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/05/21/justice-children-future-crimes-against-humanity-treaty accessed 17 July 2025.
International Criminal Court, ‘Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Publishes New Policy on Children: Statement of the ICC Prosecutor’ (18 August 2023) https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/office-prosecutor-international-criminal-court-publishes-new-policy-children-statement-icc accessed 17 July 2025.
Human Rights Watch, ‘Justice pour les enfants dans la future convention pour la prévention et la répression des crimes contre l’humanité’ (14 May 2025) https://www.hrw.org/fr/news/2025/05/14/justice-pour-les-enfants-dans-la-future-convention-pour-la-prevention-et-la accessed 17 July 2025.
The article 2(1)(h) of the current draft defines crimes against humanity and tends to include in it “the persecution of any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, or gender grounds, or on other grounds universally recognised as impermissible under international law”. However, the Coalition has pointed out that age, though already considered a possible basis for persecution under the category of “other grounds”, is not explicitly listed.
In fact, this omission truly matters. Including age as a ground for persecution would increase the visibility of crimes specifically targeting children. As a result, national and international prosecutors would be more likely to pursue such charges. In conflict settings, children are not deliberately targeted despite their age, but because of it.
The definition of persecution in Article 7(2)(g) of the current draft mirrors that of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which describes it as “the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity”. The explicit inclusion of age in the future Convention would not only clarify existing law, but also affirm the international community’s recognition of childhood itself.
This change is more than just a legal adjustment. It is about recognising children not as collateral victims, but as individuals with rights and dignity. All souls whose future is worthy and deserves to be defended. With the support of over two dozen organisations working for justice, health, and education, the call is clear: this new convention must no longer overlook the youngest victims of humanity’s worst crimes.
The Coalition first asks for the explicit recognition of children as specific victims of crimes against humanity. Whether through the forced recruitment of child soldiers, targeted abductions, sexual violence, or the use of terror tactics, the crimes committed against children reflect a deliberate strategy that must be codified. A formal recognition would be an undeniable step towards making international law more in line with how conflicts play out in our modern and technological reality.
In their report, experts and organisations also call for the adoption of age-sensitive procedures that allow children to participate in legal processes without experiencing additional trauma, including and ensuring adequate psychological support, adapting testimony formats to their developmental needs, while still prioritising the child’s best interests in judicial proceedings. Through children’s voices, protection and engagement must recognise them as survivors, not mere symbols.
The Coalition also points to the need for a structural shift in how States assume their responsibilities by imposing positive obligations on them to prevent such atrocities from occurring in the first place. When it comes to redress, organisations also advocate for the
International Law Commission, ‘Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with Commentaries’ (7 July 2019) UN Doc A/74/10 (2019) https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/7_7_2019.pdf accessed 17 July 2025.
establishment of reparation mechanisms, tailored to the child’s age, psychological well-being, and long-term development. It is only logical that reparations must go beyond the financial aspect to encompass education, rehabilitation, social reintegration, and of course, emotional healing.
Finally, the enforcement into concrete action cannot be made without robust follow-up and accountability frameworks, through reporting obligations, independent monitoring bodies, and accessible complaint procedures. It is obvious that without effective oversight, the convention might risk remaining more aspirational than operational.
Where children remain on the periphery of justice, it is time to craft a system that not only sees them but also defends them with all the urgency, humanity, and solutions they deserve.
Europe’s Ambivalent Commitment
The European Union already submitted written comments to the International Law Commission’s at its 71st session, in 2019, draft articles concerning the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. A comprehensive strategy has also been established by the Council of Europe to protect children’s rights, detailed in its 2022–2027 report. It adopts a holistic vision, urging member states to uphold children’s rights across all contexts, which might also include armed conflicts and international crimes. The Lanzarote Convention is still an essential tool, however, it is not sufficient when it comes to addressing crimes against humanity.
The European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) tends to grant broad discretion to member states, through a cautious approach under the principle of subsidiarity. The inadequate enforcement of children’s rights remains the consequence, while also weakening the Convention’s impact in urgent and complex conflict situations.
Europe’s ambivalent role is more than evident. We only have to look at several recent rulings by the ECtHR such as HF and Others v France (Application no 16523/17), ECtHR, March 15th, 2022 where the Court addressed the plight of children of European nationals detained in camps in northeast Syria. However, despite these judicial decisions, many states remain reluctant to repatriate these children, leaving them stranded in precarious and often dangerous conditions without a clear resolution. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) also reiterated this concern in its observations on Finland.
European Union, ‘Written Comments by the European Union on the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity’ (71st Session, 2019).
Council of Europe, Council of Europe Strategy for the Rights of the Child (2022–2027) (CDENF(2023)27, 2023) https://edoc.coe.int/en/children-s-rights/11015-council-of-europe-strategy-for-the-rights-of-the-child-2022-2027.html accessed 17 July 2025.
HF and Others v France (Application no 16523/17) ECtHR 15 March 2022 https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=46695&opac_view=-1 accessed 17 July 2025.
Ann Skelton, ‘Ann Skelton in Al Jazeera on Child Rights in Syria Camps’ (Leiden University, 21 October 2022) https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/in-the-media/2022/10/ann-skelton-in-aljazeera-on-child-rights-in-syria-campsaccessed 17 July 2025.
On July 9th, 2025 the ECtHR found Russia responsible for flagrant and widespread human rights violations committed in the context of the conflict in Ukraine since 2014. On the exact same date, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, was leading a conference aimed at exposing the situation of children in Ukraine, where he recalled that thousands of Ukrainian children have been deported or are still displaced, many have lost years of schooling, and far too many have lost their homes and families, have been injured, or have even died.
Though these rulings are promising, we need to place our high hopes on tangible change. To go beyond denunciation means ensuring that concrete measures are implemented and that their impacts become visible. Words alone are not enough, action must follow.
While these judgements demonstrate Europe’s legal engagement, their effectiveness on the ground has been limited, underscoring persistent challenges in protecting vulnerable children amid conflict.
Toward a Stronger European Liability
To fully embrace its responsibility, Europe should position itself as a driving force in shaping the future international Convention on Crimes Against Humanity, particularly by embedding specific provisions recognising children as distinct victims. For instance, the European Union could propose an additional protocol to the Convention, or promote a joint declaration of commitment by Council of Europe member states. However, aligning the principles of children’s rights, human rights, and international criminal law across European institutions is essential.
We expect greater coordination between European institutions, notably within the Council of Europe, the European Union, the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), and the European Commissioner for Children’s Rights. Their cooperation would help to ensure coherent and aligned action, ensuring policies are fully harmonised and the protection of children is prioritised.
Conclusion
The inclusion of child-specific provisions and child-centred approaches in the future convention is becoming more than urgent. Recognising the unique experiences and needs of children affected by crimes against humanity will strengthen their protection, as well as, guarantee accountability for the perpetrators. Another meaningful aspect is to make sure the youngest victims, who too often suffer disproportionately and in silence, can access decent and adequate reparations.
Ukraine and the Netherlands v Russia (Applications nos 8019/16, 43800/14, 28525/20 and 11055/22) ECtHR, Grand Chamber, 9 July 2025 https://www.echr.coe.int/fr/w/grand-chamber-judgment-in-an-inter-state-case-1 accessed 17 July 2025.
Council of Europe, ‘Conference in Strasbourg Takes Stock of the Situation of the Children of Ukraine, Three and a Half Years into the War’ (Council of Europe, 3 July 2025) https://www.coe.int/fr/web/portal/-/conference-in-strasbourg-takes-stock-of-the-situation-of-the-children-of-ukraine-three-and-a-half-years-into-the-war accessed 17 July 2025.
Europe, with its robust legal instruments and institutions, is able to play a leading role by fully utilising and strengthening, in a rigorous and strategic way, these tools to protect children and hold violators accountable. Its commitment and proactive engagement will be essential to set a strong example and drive global progress. However, this will work only by placing children at the heart of international legal frameworks and by raising Europe’s potential can we hope to uphold their rights and break the heartbreaking cycle of violence that continues to devastate their lives.
Bibliography
Amnesty International, ‘Pourquoi faut-il une convention sur les crimes contre l’humanité ?’ (Amnesty Belgique, n.d.) https://www.amnesty.be/infos/blogs/blog-paroles-chercheurs-defenseurs-victimes/article/pourquoi-faut-convention-crimes-humanite accessed 17 July 2025.
Council of Europe, Child-friendly Justice (CoE) https://www.coe.int/en/web/children/child-friendly-justice accessed 17 July 2025.
Council of Europe, ‘Children’s Rights in Crisis and Emergency Situations: A New Council of Europe Priority for 2022–2027’ (CoE) https://www.coe.int/fr/web/portal/-/children-s-rights-in-crisis-and-emergency-situations-a-new-council-of-europe-priority-for-2022-2027 accessed 17 July 2025.
Council of Europe, ‘Conference in Strasbourg Takes Stock of the Situation of the Children of Ukraine (2025)’ https://www.coe.int/fr/web/portal/-/conference-in-strasbourg-takes-stock-of-the-situation-of-the-children-of-ukraine-three-and-a-half-years-into-the-war accessed 17 July 2025.
Council of Europe, Council of Europe Strategy for the Rights of the Child (2022–2027) (CDENF(2023)27, 2023) https://edoc.coe.int/en/children-s-rights/11015-council-of-europe-strategy-for-the-rights-of-the-child-2022-2027.html accessed 17 July 2025.
Council of Europe, ‘Lanzarote Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse’ (2007) https://www.coe.int/en/web/children/lanzarote-convention accessed 17 July 2025.
European Court of Human Rights, Guide des droits de l’enfant (KS ECHR) https://ks.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr-ks/guide_rights_of_the_child_fre accessed 17 July 2025.
European Court of Human Rights, Guide on the Rights of the Child (KS ECHR) https://ks.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr-ks/guide_rights_of_the_child_eng accessed 17 July 2025.
European Union, ‘Statement to the Sixth Committee of the UN General Assembly (78th session) on the draft articles on crimes against humanity’ (2023) UN Doc A/C.6/78/SR.20 accessed 17 July 2025.
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), Handbook on European law relating to the rights of the child(2015) https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2015/handbook-european-law-relating-rights-child accessed 17 July 2025.
Global Justice Lab, ‘Analyse : enfin une convention pour la prévention et la répression des crimes contre l’humanité ?’ (18 December 2024) https://globaljustice.queenslaw.ca/news/analyse-enfin-une-convention-pour-la-prevention-et-la-repression-des-crimes-contre-lhumanite accessed 17 July 2025.
Human Rights Watch (HRW), ‘Justice pour les enfants dans la future convention pour la prévention et la répression des crimes contre l’humanité’ (14 May 2025) https://www.hrw.org/fr/news/2025/05/14/justice-pour-les-enfants-dans-la-future-convention-pour-la-prevention-et-la accessed 17 July 2025.
Human Rights Watch (HRW), ‘Justice for children in a future crimes against humanity treaty’ (21 May 2025) https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/05/21/justice-children-future-crimes-against-humanity-treaty accessed 17 July 2025.
Human Rights Watch (HRW), Justice for Children and the Proposed Crimes Against Humanity Treaty (May 2025) https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/05/05/justice-children-future-convention-prevention-and-punishment-crimes-against accessed 17 July 2025.
International Criminal Court, ‘Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Publishes New Policy on Children: Statement of the ICC Prosecutor’ (18 August 2023) https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/office-prosecutor-international-criminal-court-publishes-new-policy-children-statement-icc accessed 17 July 2025.
International Law Commission, ‘Draft Articles on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity, with Commentaries’ (adopted by the ILC at its 71st session, 2019, UN Doc A/74/10 (2019)) accessed 17 July 2025.
Leiden Law Blog, ‘NATO: Protecting children from war starts with the arms trade’ (2022) https://www.leidenlawblog.nl/articles/nato-protecting-children-from-war-starts-with-the-arms-trade accessed 17 July 2025.
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), ‘Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity’ (1968) https://www.ohchr.org/fr/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-non-applicability-statutory-limitations-war-crimes accessed 17 July 2025.
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), ‘Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide’ (1948) https://www.ohchr.org/fr/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-prevention-and-punishment-crime-genocide accessed 17 July 2025.
ReliefWeb, ‘Justice for children in a future convention for the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity’ (14 May 2025) https://reliefweb.int/report/world/justice-children-future-convention-prevention-and-punishment-crimes-against-humanity accessed 17 July 2025.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998, entered into force 1 July 2002) 2187 UNTS 3 https://www.icc-cpi.int/publications/core-legal-texts/rome-statute-international-criminal-court accessed 17 July 2025.
Sixth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/ accessed 17 July 2025.
Skelton A, ‘Child rights jurisprudence without borders: Developments in extraterritorial jurisdiction’ (2023) De Jure Law Journal https://www.dejure.up.ac.za/skelton-a-2023 accessed 17 July 2025.
Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights, ‘La Russie responsable de violations des droits de l’homme flagrantes et généralisées’ (Euractiv, 2024) https://www.euractiv.fr/section/politics/news/cedh-la-russie-responsable-de-violations-des-droits-de-lhomme-flagrantes-et-generalisees/ accessed 17 July 2025.
UNICEF, ‘La Convention relative aux droits de l’enfant’ (n.d.) https://www.unicef.fr/convention-droits-enfants/ accessed 17 July 2025.
Universiteit Leiden, ‘Ann Skelton in Al Jazeera on child rights in Syria camps’ (October 2022) https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/in-the-media/2022/10/ann-skelton-in-aljazeera-on-child-rights-in-syria-campsaccessed 17 July 2025.
Van Bueren G, ‘Child Rights in International Humanitarian Law’ in Liesbeth Zegveld and Bérénice Boutin (eds), Armed Conflict and International Law: In Search of the Human Face (Brill 2020) https://brill.com/edcollchap-oa/book/9789004417021/BP000004.xml accessed 17 July 2025.
