Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context

1
INVESTIGATION
AND
PROSECUTION
OF
CHILDREN
IN
A
COUNTER-TERRORISM
CONTEXT
E
X
P
E
R
T
B
R
I
E
F
I
N
G
S
E
R
I
E
S
2022 crtgroup.org

2
© 2022 CRTG Working Group
Working Group on Children Recruited by Terrorist and Violent Extremist Groups
Web: crtgroup.org
EX POST PAPERS
JULY 2022
ABOUT CRTG WORKING GROUP
The premier international nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting the rights and well-being of children at risk, victims and
survivors of terrorist recruitment and use. The CRTG Working Group existence and work is both critical and groundbreaking for
children affected by terrorism and to withstand the intergenerational perpetuation of terrorist cycles of violence.
ABOUT THIS EX POST PAPER
On July 7, 2022, the CRTG Working Group hosted an Expert Briefing on Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-
Terrorism Context by Mr. Emerson Cachon, Programme Manager with the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law (IIJ)
and Ms. Irina Urumova, Independent Expert on Child Protection and International Investigations and Co-Author of the IIJ Juvenile
Justice Note for Investigators. The purpose of this paper is to offer a series of recommendations to policymakers and practitioners
responsible for providing justice responses to children affected by terrorism and violent extremism. This guidance is the result of
shared insights, lessons learned, practical examples and policy recommendations from the joint meeting between the CRTG Working
Group, Mr. Emerson Cachon and Ms. Urumova.
LICENSING AND DISTRIBUTION
CRTGWorking Group publications are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial No Derivatives
License, which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
This report was written by Cecilia Polizzi, President / Founding Executive
Director of CRTG Working Group

3
05 JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN
11 RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACHES AND TOOLS
12 CHILD SENSITIVE INVESTIGATIONS
13 DIVERSION

15 REHABILITATION AND REINTEGRATION

16 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY POLICING

18 THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY
19 VULNERABILITY FACTORS AND DRIVERS

20 CHILDREN AFFECTED BY THE FOREIGN-FIGHTER PHENOMENON
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
On July 7, 2022, the CRTG Working Group hosted an Expert Briefing on Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a
Counter-Terrorism Context by Mr. Emerson Cachon, Programme Manager with the International Institute for Justice and the
Rule of Law (IIJ) and Ms. Irina Urumova, Independent Expert on Child Protection and International Investigations and Co-
Author of the IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators. The issue of children recruited and used by terrorist actors has
grown disproportionately in the past several years. In its contemporary dimension, the involvement of children in terrorism
has emerged as a critical trend in the tactics and strategy of terrorist and violent extremist organizations and as an
identifiable manifestation across the ideological spectrum. Terrorist and violent extremist organizations recruit, use, and
exploit children in a multitude of ways, including for the perpetration of terrorism-related offenses and severe acts of
violence under international law. The alleged involvement of children in terrorism and terrorism-related activities brings
into consideration fundamental questions in relation to the legal frameworks, procedures and authorities that these
children should be subjected to and calls for appropriate and coordinated responses.
The CRTG Working Group equips policymakers, professionals and practitioners with the tools necessary to understand and
respond to violence against children in terrorism. We build support for good governance that enables child protection in
terrorism. We engage directly with a range of stakeholders to seek and share information, build awareness and encourage
positive action for children. The aim of this Expert Briefing on justice for children in a counter-terrorism context was to
bring together practitioners to share observations and explore good practices to guide the efforts of investigators,
prosecutors, and policymakers in handling children affected by terrorism while accommodating for security concerns and
respecting child rights. The session was attended by Mr. Jamie Brown on behalf of the Counter-Terrorism Division of the
Council of Europe and by Ms. Safinas Ahayeva, UNICEF Uzbekistan.
The purpose of this paper is to offer a series of recommendations to policymakers and practitioners responsible for
providing justice responses to children affected by terrorism and violent extremism. This guidance is the result of shared
insights, lessons learned, practical examples and policy recommendations from the joint meeting between the CRTG
Working Group, Mr. Emerson Cachon and Ms. Urumova. It is divided into the following nine sections: (i) justice for children;
(ii) risk assessment approaches and tools; (iii) child sensitive investigations; (iv) diversion; (v) rehabilitation and reintegration;
(vi) community engagement and community policing; (vii) the role of civil society; (viii) vulnerability factors and drivers; (ix)
children affected by the foreign-fighter phenomenon.
4

JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN ALLEGEDLY ACCUSED OR CHARGED WITH
TERRORISM AND RELATED OFFENSES
01. Recommendation: Identify and consider all factors impacting child decision-making
processes in determining the legal status of children in a counter-terrorism context.
Action Point 4: All children recruited and exploited by violent extremist and terrorist groups shall be primarily recognised as victims
IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Prosecutors
Action Point 6: Police and investigators should consider children primarily as victims of offences against international law, and consider
safeguarding measures when warranted
IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators
Action Point 6: Child court judges should assess child suspects holistically and consider whether their alleged criminal conduct was voluntary, IIJ
Juvenile Justice Note for Judges
Child recruitment by terrorist and violent extremist groups and indoctrination or radicalization to violent extremism remain
high on the counterterrorism agenda. Much of the discourse to date has focused on the dual status of children involved in
terrorism-related offenses, the need to primarily treat such children as victims and to extend the full panoply of
protections to children involved with the justice system in connection with their suspected involvement in the commission
of terrorism-related offenses. Determinations of the legal status of children alleged offenders of terrorism and related
1
offenses remain a key challenge facing justice professionals. Under international law, children recruited and used by
terrorist and violent extremist organizations are considered to be victims primarily. However, in practice, the status of
children as victims is not recognized due to misconceptions about the implications of the child’s “consent” to a recruitment
process. The CRTG Working Group holds that no child recruitment process can be regarded truly as voluntary owing to the
forms of coercion and influence used in recruitment methods and in view of the age of the child and his or her evolving
capacities. Recognizing the status of children as victims does not imply that children are never responsible for their
actions. It rather implies that the formation of rational choice in children may be influenced, guided or shaped by their
2
evolving cognitive capacities, development and enhanced disregard for risks and/or prowess to risk-taking behavior. As
Irina Urumova, The Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context, CRTG Working Group Expert Briefing Series, July 2022.
1
The rational choice theory offers an explanation of crime and delinquency and holds a utilitarian belief that an individual is a reasoning actor who weights
2
means and ends, costs and benefits, and makes a rational choice.
5
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

such, any undertaking of violent action by children is driven by factors that fundamentally differ from the ones of adult
offenders, and all responses to children in conflict with the law in a counter-terrorism context, albeit non-exclusively, are to
be thoroughly identified and accounted for. In addition, the very susceptibility to Indoctrination to violent extremist
ideology in the process of identity formation that makes children more malleable material for violent radicalization also
creates a window of opportunity for treatment.
02. Recommendation: Consider evidence in determining intervention by law enforcement or
social services in early response systems aimed at preventing or addressing terrorism and
terrorism-related offenses involving minors.
In recent years, the fight against terrorism and political violence has focused more on anticipating threats. Consequently,
early detection and early response systems have increasingly become valuable mechanisms and tools for preventative
action. An early warning and early response system (EWER) is a regular and organized collection and analysis of open
3
sources information and the linking of such information to formal and institutionalized response mechanisms to prevent
violence. The value of early warning lies in the response capacity whereas the effectiveness of response mechanisms
hinges on the quality of early warning information. In addressing the involvement, potential or actual, of minors in
4
terrorism and terrorism-related offenses, the provision of timely responses assumes a higher degree of preponderance as
it is connected with, and supportive of, the child´s best interest as well as public safety. In this context, the role of
investigators may be functional in securing links between early response and the need for prevention. With the aim of
5
ensuring appropriate responses in cases of terrorism and terrorism-related offenses involving minors, questions may arise
with respect to the need for intervention by law enforcement or social services. In most cases, intervention should be
handled by social and child protective services responding to signs or indicators of violent extremism at the structural and/
or individual level, including but not limited to online and offline behavioral changes and factors related to children´s social
ecology, which may provide a context or background for the emergence of violent extremism. Intervention by social and
child protective services should be accompanied by non-invasive action by law enforcement such as monitoring and/or
observation. In circumstances where a threshold triggering action in criminal terms has not been reached, no fundamental
conflict exists between early response and intervention by law enforcement, social services, or P/CVE practitioners.
Intervention by law enforcement is, however, required in cases in which the minor concerned is above the Minimum Age of
Criminal Responsibility (MACR). The child's best interests as well as the totality of evidence collected by investigators should
inform decisions regarding early responses and intervention type. The focus on early detection and early intervention also
requires practitioners to obtain a clear picture of the factors that put children at risk of engagement with terrorists and
violent extremists as well as any “red flags” or indicators that should be followed up on. For instance, incidents of a child
Annemarie van de Weert & Quirine Eijkman (2021) Reconsidering Early Detection in Countering Radicalization by Local Frontline Professionals, Terrorism and
3
Political Violence, 33:2, 397-408, DOI: 10.1080/09546553.2021.1880237.
DB Subedi (2017) Early Warning and Response for Preventing Radicalization and Violent Extremism, Peace Review, 29:2, 135-143, DOI:
4
10.1080/10402659.2017.1308185.
Ibid.
5
6

going missing or missing from school need to be thoroughly investigated. Beyond short-term risks to such children’s safety,
there may be other risks, especially in the case of older children and teenagers.6
03. Recommendation: Evaluate the involvement of parents or guardians with violent
extremism in the appointment of legal counsel and assistance during judicial proceedings of
children suspected or accused of terrorism and related offenses.
Action Point 4: Child court judges should appoint counsel as soon as possible for children charged with terrorism-related offences in accordance
with international and national law
IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Judges
Children alleged to have committed or accused of having committed, conspired to commit, or attempted to commit a
terrorism-related offense have the right to prompt access to legal counsel, legal aid, and the right to assistance of their
parents or legal guardians. Rule 15.2 of the Beijing Rules states that the parents or guardian shall be entitled to participate
7
in the proceedings and may be required by the competent authority to attend them in the interest of the juvenile.8
However, in cases in which strong evidence exists regarding the involvement of parents or legal guardians in terrorism or
violent extremism, participation may be denied by the competent authority as such exclusion may be assumed necessary
in the interest of the juvenile.
04. Recommendation: Establish specialized child units across the justice system dedicated
to the handling of cases involving children.
Action Point 1: Cases involving children should be handled by specialised police units
Action Point 1: Prosecutors should work in specialised units that handle child cases involving terrorism and related offences
Major human rights treaties and other international law instruments recognize that juvenile suspects need to be treated
distinctly from adults in any criminal investigation or prosecution. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the
9
Ibid at 1.
6
United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, para. 18 (a).
7
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice ("The Beijing Rules"), Adopted by General Assembly resolution 40/33 of 29
8
November 1985.
UN General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20 November 1989, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577.
9
7

United Nations Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules) and the International Covenant on
10
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) contain important safeguards in relation to the treatment of children within the justice
11
system, including children charged with, prosecuted for, and sentenced in relation to terrorist offenses. Article 40(3)(a) of
the CRC requires States Parties to “(…) promote the establishment of laws, procedures, authorities and institutions
specifically applicable to children alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law, and, in particular:
(a) The establishment of a minimum age below which children shall be presumed not to have the capacity to infringe the
penal law.” In addition, Rule 4.1 of the Beijing Rules states that the minimum age “shall not be fixed at too low an age level,
12
bearing in mind the factors of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity.” The ICCPR specifically addresses the rights of
13
juvenile suspects by providing that “accused juvenile persons shall be separated from adults and brought as speedily as
possible for adjudication” and that, if convicted, juvenile offenders “shall be segregated from adults and be accorded
14
treatment appropriate to their age and legal status.” Despite these provisions, due to security concerns and the discretion
15
retained by States with regard to the definition of a minimum age of criminal accountability for minors, children
16
associated with terrorist and violent extremist groups are oftentimes subjected to the same treatment within the justice
system as the one reserved to adult offenders including investigation, pre-and-post trial detention and/or criminal
proceedings. The lack of distinction between juvenile and adult offenders in terrorism and terrorism-related cases
contrasts with juvenile justice standards, principles and purposes of rehabilitation and reintegration. The IIJ Juvenile
Justice Practitioners´ Notes recognize that while international instruments do not expressly provide for the establishment
of separate and specialized units for handling cases of terrorism and related offenses involving minors, the dutiful
application of juvenile justice standards in counter-terrorism requires in-depth awareness of not only the cognitive,
physical, psychological, social development, trauma and trauma history of children and the particular context in which the
offense has been committed but also of children´s rights and procedural safeguards in the justice system. The
17
establishment of separate child units constituted by trained personnel and practitioners should hence be considered at all
stages of the justice system. When this is not feasible due to lack of resources or other constraints, States should seek to
provide specialized training to all justice sector practitioners handling cases of terrorism and terrorism-related offenses
involving children.18
UN General Assembly, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (“The Beijing Rules”): resolution / adopted by the
10
General Assembly, 29 November 1985, A/RES/40/33.
UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171, available at: https://
11
www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3aa0.html [accessed 15 September 2022].
Convention on the Rights of the Child, Art. 40(3)(a).
12
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules), Rule 4.1.
13
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 10(2)(b).
14
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 10(3).
15
Despite these provisions and the recommendations by relevant organs to set this age at eighteen, international law does not establish a specific minimum age
16
for minors to be held legally responsible for their actions. Since States retain discretion on this matter, the definition of a minimum age of criminal
responsibility varies under domestic law depending on the history, culture of the country and the nature of the crime; See also Cecilia Polizzi, The Crime of
Terrorism: An Analysis of Criminal Justice Processes and Accountability of Minors Recruited by the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, UC Davis Journal of
International Law & Policy, Vol. 24.1, 2018 https://jilp.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/volume-24-1/24-1-polizzi.pdf.
IIJ, Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators, 7.
17
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (hereafter Beijing Rules), Rule 12. Specialization within the police (“12.1 In order
18
to best fulfill their functions, police officers who frequently or exclusively deal with juveniles or who are primarily engaged in the prevention of juvenile crime
shall be specially instructed and trained. In large cities, special police units should be established for that purpose.”).
8

05. Recommendation: Consider the creation of a dedicated court jurisdiction for children
suspected of or charged with terrorism or terrorism-related offenses.
Action Point 2: Only child court judges should have jurisdiction over children suspected of or charged with terrorism offences
The obligation to prosecute international crimes at the national level is a well-established principle of international law19
which takes into account the interest of singular States to sovereignty. The absence of clear minimum age and of
precedents for children alleged perpetrators of crimes under international law assumes a larger significance when coupled
with the lack of a universally agreed definition of terrorism as a criminal act and its consequent international
criminalization. Such principles and dualities create an environment in which the prosecution of children suspected or
charged with terrorism and related offenses is left to the discretion of domestic courts, which clashes with different legal
standards and results; and children may be subjected to anti-terrorism laws codified and implemented in domestic legal
systems, conflicting with pre-existing criminal procedures, juvenile justice processes and related guarantees of child
protection. As indicated in the IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Judges, ensuring compliance with the CRC and other
20 21 22
international standards requires the exercise of jurisdictional authority of child court judges applying juvenile justice laws
in all cases involving minors and the development, approval, and implementation of legislation clarifying such jurisdiction
where national law does not clearly provide for it.23
06. Recommendation: Consider the introduction of statutory provisions for the
presumption of child status in conjunction with supporting regulations stipulating the procedure
for age estimation analysis and ensuring accurate review and validation of age estimation
procedures.
Action Point 2: When age is uncertain, police and investigators should presume that the person is a child
Action Point 3: Prosecutors should verify that the child has obtained the minimum age of criminal responsibility
Art. 17 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court art. 26, Jul. 17, 1998, 2187 U.N.T.S. 90.
19
Polizzi, The Crime of Terrorism, 59.
20
The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law, IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Judges, n.d. https://www.theiij.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/
21
IIJ_JUJU_Judges-Note_ENG_Final.pdf.
Convention on the Rights of the Child, (Nov. 20, 1989).
22
Ibid 11 at 8.
23
9

The IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators suggests procedures to guide law enforcement and investigators in
determining whether a suspected child is below or above the minimum age of criminal responsibility. One of the greatest
24
barriers facing determinations concerning the age of juveniles alleged to have infringed penal law is the non-availability of
birth certificates and other documentation. Whereas the evidence presented is inconclusive and fails to substantiate age
25
determinations, the child or juvenile is to be afforded the benefit of the doubt and not held responsible for the
26
commission of offenses. With the aim of ensuring the application of the juvenile justice system to children, the IIJ Note for
Investigators recommends introducing statutory provisions for the presumption of child status and the enactment of
supporting regulations stipulating the procedure for age estimation processes. Prior to bringing charges against a
27
juvenile, prosecutors should accurately review and validate the integrity and definitiveness of investigations aimed at
assessing the child´s age. In determining whether a child has reached the minimum age of criminal responsibility,
investigators and prosecutors may consider focusing on a set of criteria which reflects the psychological, emotional and
social development stages of children. Additionally, an assessment focused on developmental progress can also help
approximate the child´s age and developmental interruptions that would need to be accounted for in any proceeding as
well as case plans and interventions.
The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law, IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators, n.d. https://www.theiij.org/wp-content/uploads/
24
2022/02/IIJ_JuJu_Investigators-Note_ENG_Final-1.pdf.
Leah Selim, What is birth registration and why does it matter? Without legal proof of identity, children are left uncounted and invisible, UNICEF, n.d. https://
25
www.unicef.org/stories/what-birth-registration-and-why-does-it-matter.
United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 24 (2019), § 34; United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, General
26
Comment No. 24 (2019), § 24.
Ibid at 2.
27
10

RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACHES AND TOOLS
07. Recommendation: Consider the inclusion of specific indicators relevant to children
associated with terrorist groups in the development of risk assessment approaches and tools.
Risk assessments are standardized tools that help practitioners collect and synthesize information about a child to
estimate that child’s risks of recidivism and identify other factors that, if treated and changed, can reduce the youth’s
likelihood of reoffending. Risk assessments are not only designed to inform and guide decisions about estimating a
28
juvenile’s risk of recidivating, but they are also helpful when creating plans for appropriate treatment or services. Several
such tools widely used for violent extremism, including the VERA-2R, the ERG 22+, the SQAT, the IR46, the RRAP, the Radar,
and the VAF, present however a set of limitations when children associated with terrorist groups are concerned. Violent
29
extremist offenders, including children, demonstrate different risk indicators compared to ordinary violent offenders and,
as the mere use of risk assessment approaches for regular crimes can blur important distinctions, to assess the potential
30
for a child to engage in extremist violence, specific indicators relevant to violent extremist as well as to children´s individual
experiences as differentiated by age, gender, victimization and trauma history and family background need to be included.
Additionally, since the Internet and social media platforms enhance not only opportunities for terrorist and violent
extremist groups to outreach to children but also constitute a significant vector for consumption of propaganda materials,
the realm of children´s information environment should be thoroughly analyzed and accounted for. Furthermore,
criminological research strongly supports a positive correlation between offending behavior and tolerant attitudes towards
violence. It derives that the development and implementation of risk assessment tools designed specifically for children
31
should be based on observable patterns of conduct rather than on past behavior, as the latter may be difficult to
determine in motivational terms. All tools designed to ensure that children at risk are properly and timely identifies should
comply with international rights of the child and specifically to the right to privacy of the child.32
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2014 National Report, 2014 https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/library/publications/
28
juvenile-offenders-and-victims-2014-national-report; See also Gina M. Vincent et al., Risk Assessment and in Juvenile Justice a Guidebook for Implementation,
2012, https://www.umassmed.edu/globalassets/center-for-mental-health-services-research/documents/nysap/risk-assessment-guidebook.pdf.
Existing risk assessment tools are based on male, adult data only.
29
In the Netherlands, from the age of 16 children may already be subject to exceptional measures for adult terrorism- related suspects and offenders, including
30
detention in the specialised high-security ‘Terrorism Ward’ at the Vught Penitentiary Institution and deprivation of citizenship under the Interim Administrative
Measures Act of 2017.
Ibid at 5.
31
Convention on the Rights of the Child, Art. 16 and 40(2)(b)(vii); United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing
32
Rules), Rule 8; United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty, Rule 19.
11
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

CHILD SENSITIVE INVESTIGATIONS
08. Recommendation: The best interest of the child should be upheld as a primary
consideration at all stages of proactive investigation into terrorism and violent extremism-
related offenses.
Action Point 7: Police and investigators should consider the child´s best interest in any investigations including special investigative operations
The best interest of the child is a consideration of paramount importance throughout all stages of proactive investigation
into the activities and operations of terrorist and violent extremist organizations by law enforcement and non-specialized
personnel. Where children are encountered during an investigative process, they must be treated primarily as victims
under international law and protected against further harm and/or secondary victimization. In this framework, further harm
is to be intended as the result of terrorist and violent extremist action, Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) that affected
the child prior to recruitment or which may have represented a driving factor for recruitment, whereas secondary
victimization refers to the treatment of children within the justice system. Intelligence analysis may be relied upon to
inform any safeguarding measure to be applied with respect to children in this context, including the necessity of
extracting a child without compromising the ongoing investigation.
09. Recommendation: Deliver training to police and investigators on child sensitive
investigations to provide the best opportunities for children affected by terrorism and violent
extremism.
The IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators highlights the key role that police, and investigators play in terrorism-related
cases involving children. Child involvement in terrorism and terrorism-related offenses oftentimes occurs as the result of
33
forcible action, including but not limited to intimidation, threat and other forms of coercion by adults exploiting children´s
vulnerability as determined by age, lack of discernment and malleability. The individual circumstances of the child and the
impact of trauma and exposure to violence and other stressors should inform police and investigators´ operating
procedures regarding children associated with terrorist groups. Increased awareness and understanding of these factors
will allow for the development of child-sensitive operational procedures that can improve investigative capacities and avoid
possible further victimization within the criminal justice system.34
IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators, 18.
33
Ibid.
34
12
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

DIVERSION
 
10. Recommendation: Whenever appropriate and feasible, consider implementing and
promoting norms that contain specific provisions for the application of diversion
mechanisms for children suspected or charged with terrorism and related offenses.
Action Point 5: Police should grant diversionary measures before arrest in appropriate cases involving children suspected of or charged with
terrorism offences
Action Point 7: Prosecutors should have the authority to offer children diversionary measures that avoid criminal prosecution and should use
that authority to the greatest extent possible
Action Point 8: Child court judges should order diversion in appropriate cases
The Neuchâtel Memorandum, endorsed by the GCTF in September 2016, describes diversion as the “conditional channeling
of children in conflict with the law outside the judicial proceedings towards a different way of addressing the issue that
enables many children’s cases to be resolved by non-judicial bodies, thereby avoiding the negative effects of formal judicial
proceedings and a criminal record.” International law prescribes no limitation on the use of diversion for dealing with a
child who is in conflict with the law in a counter-terrorism context. Aside from the several advantages in using diversion
35
over submitting children to formal criminal proceedings including - among others - preventing risks of violence against
children, secondary victimization within the criminal justice system and re-recruitment, it exists a growing evidence of its
effectiveness in preventing recidivism. States are hence encouraged to promote diversionary measures for children in
36
conflict with the law in a counter-terrorism context, whenever appropriate and desirable, and providing that human rights
and legal safeguards are fully respected.37
The “UN Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures” (The Tokyo Rules) also provides an international framework for developing and implementing
35
alternative non-custodial sentencing options, which supports alternatives to custody when appropriate and the overall reintegration processes for offenders.;
See also United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 10 (2007) Children’s Rights in Juvenile Justice, 25 April 2007 (CRC/C/GC/10),
para. 24.
Johann Koehler et al., “A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of young offender treatment programs in Europe,” (2013) 9 1 Journal of
36
Experimental Criminology, 19-43. See also David B. Wilson et al., “Police Initiated Diversion for Youth to Prevent Future Delinquent Behavior: A Systematic
Review,” A Campbell Systematic Review, June 2018.
Article 40(3)(b) of the CRC. Diversionary measures are also referred to in Rule 11 of the Beijing Rules (General Assembly, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules
37
for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules), adopted by the General Assembly on 29 November 1985 (A/RES/40/33)); United Nations Economic
and Social Council, Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal Justice System resolution 1997/30, 21 July 1997, paras. 15 and 42; and, the General Assembly,
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules), adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/110), rule
2.5.
13
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

11. Recommendation: Increase training on diversion, alternatives to prosecution and
incarceration of children charged with terrorism and related offenses.
Many countries do have laws and procedures in place that promote the diversion of children from formal judicial
proceedings. However, the use of diversion is not always fully embedded in the juvenile justice system. Among the
challenges hampering the use of diversion in a counter-terrorism context: (i) the priority for investment in the justice
system to correctional facilities infrastructures rather than diversion interventions, (ii) considerations that diversionary
measures may be unsuitable in a counter-terrorism context or too lenient and, (iii) the lack of knowledge and resources of
justice professionals needed to implement diversionary measures in an effective manner. Since diversion may occur at
various levels of the justice system, it is critical for practitioners to be able to evaluate and assess when alternatives to
formal judicial proceedings for children can and should be employed, as well as assess the profile and background of a
child and select the most likely effective diversion measure and monitor implementation.38
Best Practices
The Philippines´ Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council issued a resolution containing revised rules and regulations
implementing Republic Act No. 9344, Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, as amended by Republic Act No. 10630.
The Council resolution sets out the specific rules prosecutors must follow in entering into diversion agreements with
children in conflict with the law (see sections 50-56). Initially, the resolution identifies the specific cases in which
prosecutors may agree to diversion, such as those in which children are accused of offenses with a maximum
sentence of six years’ imprisonment. It also stipulates that prosecutors will chair the diversion committees that
recommend whether diversion should be granted in particular cases. The committees must include representatives
from designated public and private entities. Prosecutors’ duties in directing the committees are also set out, as are
the factors the committees must consider in deciding whether diversion is appropriate.
Niger has created a Transit and Referral Center to receive children affected by terrorism as victims, witnesses or
alleged offenders. Children in these centers receive MHPSS and vocational training, and are aided by social workers in
the development of a plan for the life of the child. Special educators and community leaders are also involved with
providing care and assistance to children.
In the Netherlands, youths arrested by law enforcement are referred to Bureau Halt which offers an alternative to
formal processing of the case and arranges restitution for injured parties. If they choose the Halt approach, the youth
themselves must develop a proposal for alternative "punishment" that must have the consent of the youth's parents
and the injured parties. Approved plans are organized and monitored by Halt. If the youth refuses to participate in Halt
or fails in the program, an official report is sent to the public prosecutor, who may decide to pursue formal processing
of the case. The Halt program provides an immediate response to the offense and involves only a minimum of
administrative work by police or judicial authorities. Labeling effects are also avoided. Eighty-five percent of the
young persons referred to Halt agree to the procedure, and most of the victims cooperate with the program.39
UNODC Justice for Children in the Context of Counter-Terrorism: A Training Manual, 2019 https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3825844?ln=en.
38
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Diversion in the Netherlands: Bureau Halt, 1991
39
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/diversion-netherlands-bureau-halt-future-juvenile-justice-system-p.
14

REHABILITATION AND REINTEGRATION
12. Recommendation: Consider the creation of Transit and Referral/Rehabilitation Centers
for children who are not prosecuted for terrorism and/or terrorism-related offenses.
Rehabilitation and reintegration of children associated with terrorism and violent extremist groups must be the key
objective for States and other stakeholders involved with the provision of justice responses in this context. Rehabilitation
requires addressing the specific needs of children and focusing on reinstating or establishing a relationship between the
child and his or her social environment, hence accounting not only for the individual circumstances of the child but also for
the context in which the child is to be reinserted. The transition to rehabilitation and reintegration should be carefully
organized as there may be challenges associated with direct release of the child into society. The creation of Transit and
Referral/Rehabilitation Centers is hence advised. In Transit and Referral/Rehabilitation Centers children should promptly
40
access physical and psychological professional treatment and it is of paramount importance that practitioners and all
actors involved with children formerly associated with terrorist and violent extremist organizations receive adequate
training. Assistance and care for children should continue for the entire period of time in which the child resides in Transit
41
and Referral/Rehabilitation Centers. The permanence of children in Transit and Referral/Rehabilitation Centers should be,
however, for a limited and clearly defined period of time only. The creation of Transit and Referral/Rehabilitation Centers
may significantly contribute to children´s rehabilitation and social reintegration and facilitate access to educational and
vocational training.
UNODC, Discussion Paper Rehabilitation and Reintegration, Expert Group Meeting on The Treatment of Children Recruited and Exploited by Terrorist and
40
Violent Extremist Groups by the Justice System, 2016, https://radical.hypotheses.org/files/2018/01/UNODC.pdf.
European Commission Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, Small-scale expert meeting on Training for practitioners on dealing with returning
41
children, online meeting 30 September 2021, 2021, https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/whats-new/publications/small-scale-expert-meeting-training-
practitioners-dealing-returning-children-online-meeting-30_en#details.
15
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY POLICING
13. Recommendation:Build resilience to violent extremism and support preventative action
through effective engagement with local communities and community policing.
Action Point 3: Police and investigators should engage with the community
The IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators upholds that “community policing should be promoted as an effective
approach to prevent terrorism that improves outreach to hard-to-reach groups and strengthens the resilience of
children.” It further proceeds to emphasize the importance of developing appropriate strategies for fostering community
42
engagement. While engagement with local communities and community-oriented policing are deemed critical to
generating information and intelligence, such processes should be conjoined, transparent and reciprocal. Mechanisms of
cooperation between local communities and law enforcement should aim at developing information-driven, community-
based solutions to local issues. Adequate engagement with local communities and community policing is to be
43
understood as a synthesis of awareness-raising regarding violent extremist threats and capacity-building efforts aimed at
strengthening resilience and empowering communities and community-led interventions.
14. Recommendation: Establish trust with local communities for effective community
engagement and community policing.
Communities have long been understood to be critical to violence prevention across the spectrum of violence types.44
Programs aimed at reducing the risk of terrorism and violent extremism could benefit from building partnerships with
respected community leaders (e.g., religious leaders, natural community leaders, or heads of ethnic-based community
organizations) and women and youth. It is however critical to the success of interventions that engagement with local
communities is transparent, authentic and trust-engendering. The implementation of community policing in the absence
of trusting partnerships may not only undermine the potential for systems to respond to prospective threats with early
IIJ Juvenile Justice Note for Investigators, 11.
42
See Global Counterterrorism Forum, Good Practices on Community Engagement and Community-Oriented Policing as Tools to Counter Violent Extremism, n.d.
43
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/GCTF%20CVE%20Good%20Practices_1.pdf.
Heidi Ellis et al., Building Community Resilience to Violent Extremism Through Genuine Partnerships, American Psychologist, 2017, Vol. 72, No. 3, 289–300, http://
44
dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000065.
16
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

interventions but may also hamper investigative processes and contribute to a weakening of social connections between
45
communities and compounding risks.
Ibid at 1.
45
17

THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY
15. Recommendation: Strengthen the capacity of civil society to deliver services for
rehabilitating and reintegrating children associated with terrorist and violent extremist groups.
The existing international legal framework imposes a clear obligation on States to prohibit the recruitment and use of
children in hostilities as well as to support the social reintegration of child victims of recruitment and use. In its General
Comment N° 10 (2007), the Committee on the Rights of the Child emphasized the need for States parties to adopt a
comprehensive approach to juvenile justice and to commit themselves to broad reforms of their criminal justice system
and social responses to children in conflict with the law. However, States may require assistance in strengthening
46
legislative and institutional frameworks to protect children vulnerable and exposed to terrorist violence, abuse and
exploitation. The establishment of proactive rather than reactive responses to the recruitment and use of children by
terrorist and violent extremist groups emphasizes the adoption of multidisciplinary, multi-agency approaches. The
inclusion of civil society organizations (CSOs) and local communities is highlighted in this framework as these actors play a
significant role in the delivery of services and implementation of programs, especially in areas where governmental
capacity is at its minimum. The support of credible and legitimate CSOs is a valuable asset for developing not only
specialized knowledge of terrorism and violent extremism but also engendering positive implications, interventions and
actions in the rehabilitation and social reintegration of children associated with terrorist and violent extremist groups.
Best Practice for Child-friendly Models Designed in the Area of Justice for Children
Kazakhstan has amended the national legislative framework to enable appropriate justice responses to children in
conflict with the law in conformity with international child protection standards. The reform promoted in the
47
institutional architecture for justice for children includes adequate coordination mechanisms and the development of
related best practices and capacity building development of specialized legal professionals and governmental
institutions.48
General Comment No. 10 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child on Children’s Rights in Juvenile Justice, CRC/C/GC/10 (25 April 2007).
46
UNICEF, Juvenile Justice in Central Asia: Reforms Achievements and Challenges in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, 2012,
47
https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/gdc/gdcovop/2014323819/2014323819.pdf.
UNICEF, Evaluation of the child-friendly models designed in the area of Justice for Children in Kazakhstan, https://evaluationreports.unicef.org/
48
GetDocument?fileID=10735.
18
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

VULNERABILITY FACTORS AND DRIVERS
16. Recommendation: Identify vulnerability factors and drivers of violent extremism
involving children to ensure appropriate and tailored responses to children affected by
terrorism and violent extremism.
Good Practice 3: Address children’s vulnerability to recruitment and/or radicalization to violence through preventive measures.
Neuchâtel Memorandum
In order to be efficient, it is critical that all policies and interventions aimed at protecting children affected by terrorism
and violent extremism are evidence-based. To this end, policy-makers are encouraged to invest in specialized research
49 50
into the drivers of violent extremism and vulnerability factors that are specific to children, in conjunction with “red flag”
indicators that should be followed up by police and law enforcement and referred to child protection authorities.
CRTGWorkingGroup,ViolentRight-WingExtremism:Children´sPerspectives,PolicyandPractice,2022, https://9559314e-14e3-496d-8655-4cc858f76135.filesusr.com/
49
ugd/4fccfe_76cb981e3ce0404ebe3ecd6f7ac0d91d.pdf; See also Global Counterterrorism Forum, Neuchâtel Memorandum on Good Practices for Juvenile Justice in
a Counterterrorism Context, n.d. https://www.thegctf.org/Portals/1/Documents/Lifecycle%20Toolkit-documents/English-Neuchâtel-Memorandum-on-Juvenile-
Justice.pdf?ver=LAxU86MeyRLBynXqzArMhg%3D%3D.
CRTG Working Group, Database on Children in Terrorism, n.d.
50
19
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

CHILDREN AFFECTED BY THE FOREIGN-FIGHTER PHENOMENON
17. Recommendation: Consider the application of multi-systemic, multi-modal and multi-
stakeholder approaches to manage the repatriation of children affected by the foreign-fighter
phenomenon.
Since the inception of the Syrian crisis, thousands of foreign nationals have traveled or attempted to travel in conflict zone
in Syria and Iraq with an intent to join terrorist organizations such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da´esh)
and other insurgent terrorist groups. The condition of children of Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) who were brought by
their parents to Syria and Iraq or were born to FTFs families in the region has remained particularly concerning in the past
several years. While the repatriation of children is widely regarded as the sole viable option to ensure their well-being,
51
neutralize further security threats as well as minimize their exposure to secondary victimization, abuses and human rights
violations, States have experienced a set of unprecedented challenges concerning legal, ethical and practical questions
with respect to their obligations and capabilities for the handling of children of FTFs still abroad and the child returnee
contingent. In determining appropriate processes for child repatriation, States may consider the application of multi-
52
systemic, multi-stakeholder and multi-modal approaches involving all actors and agencies intervening on a variety of
dimensions of children´s social ecology.53
Best Practice for the Repatriation of Children Affected by the Foreign Terrorist Fighters Phenomenon
Kazakhstan has implemented a series of noteworthy practices for the repatriation, reintegration and rehabilitation of
children affected by the foreign terrorist fighters phenomenon, which include, inter alia, the provision of immediate
medical, psychological and psychotherapeutic treatment and placement in dedicated rehabilitation centers where
children may afford continuing care and access to educational and developmental activities.54
18. Recommendation: Apply a case-by-case approach to respect the right to family unity
while protecting children´s best interest in the handling of child repatriation processes.
Anita Perešin, Repatriated Foreign Terrorist Fighters and their Families: European experiences & Lessons for P/CVE,
51
CRTG Working Group Expert Briefing Series, September 2020.
CRTG Working Group, Assessment Tools for Child Returnees from Syria and Iraq, Available upon request.
52
United Nations, Key Principles for the Protection, Repatriation, Prosecution, Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Women and Children with Links to United
53
Nations Listed Terrorist Groups, 2019, https://www.un.org/counterterrorism/sites/www.un.org.counterterrorism/files/key_principles-april_2019.pdf.
Bulan Institute for Peace Innovations, The Repatriation, Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Women and Children from Syria and Iraq: The Experiences of
54
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, 2021,
https://bulaninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Report-on-Repatriation-in-Central-Asia-2.pdf.
20
Investigation
and
Prosecution
of
Children
in
a
Counter-Terrorism
Context
CRTG
Working
Group,
Expert
Briefing
Series

The need to protect children’s rights and interests in all matters is reflected across the entire spectrum of the international
law framework. The international provisions governing child repatriation efforts from camps in northeastern Syria are
55
primarily informed by the CRC and identify children as a vulnerable group whose needs and rights must be considered
56
and fulfilled in any repatriation program. No international consensus has, however, formed regarding how to manage
57
repatriation while accounting for both security and child protection concerns. One of such issues consistently emerged
with regard to the right to family unity. International law requires the maintenance of family unity as far as possible,
58
including the right of the child and his or her parents to leave any country and to enter their own. Children must therefore
59
not be separated from their parents and siblings unless it is considered in their best interest. Even in the case of
60
separation, the possibility to exchange family news must be preserved.61
The depredation of the family environment is a serious concern. Research and practice have shown the harms visited upon
children as a result of forced removal from their parents or primary caregivers, including short and long-term effects on
the child's mental and physical well-being. With an aim to ensure conformity with the rule of law as well as preventing
62
risks of traumatization or re-traumatization of children, the preservation of family unity is therefore widely recognized as
the child's best interest.
This said, the right not to be separated from one's parents is not absolute and should form part of the best interest
assessment, taking into account the totality of factors at play in each individual child's case. In circumstances in which
there is strong evidence of parental involvement with violent extremism, especially if the parent actively endeavors to
63
violently radicalize the child, measures should be taken to limit interaction between the parent and the child because it is
in the best interest of the child not to be involved in the parents´ ideology or illegal conduct. Any deliberation regarding
64
the child's best interest by a competent authority should be adequately informed by an individual assessment subject to
Universal Declaration (n 26) arts 25(2) and 26; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (n 26) arts 10 and 24; International Covenant on Economic,
55
Social and Cultural Rights (n 26) arts 10(3) and 13.
Refugee Children: Guidelines on Protection and Care, UNHCR, 1994, Geneva; Voluntary Repatriation: International Protection Handbook, UNHCR, 1996, Geneva,
56
7.2.
Ibid.
57
UNHCR, The Right to Family Life and Family Unity of Refugees and Others in Need of International Protection and the Family Definition Applied, 2018, https://
58
www.unhcr.org/5a8c40ba1.pdf.
Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) art 10(2).
59
Council of Europe Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development, International obligations concerning the repatriation of children from
60
war and conflict zones, 2020,
http://www.assembly.coe.int/LifeRay/SOC/Pdf/TextesProvisoires/2020/20200128-RepatriationChildren-EN.pdf.
ICRC, Humanitarian concerns in the aftermath of the military operations against the Islamic State group in Syria and Iraq, 2019, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/
61
default/files/Documents/Issues/Terrorism/SR/GA75/ICRCannex2-GA75CT.pdf.
As a result of forced separation children may experience sever anxiety, depression, PTSD, toxic stress and impairments in cognitive developments.; See also
62
Children’s Rights Litigation Committee of the American Bar Association Section of Litigation, Trauma Caused by Separation of Children from Parents, 2019,
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/litigation_committees/childrights/child-separation-memo/parent-child-separation-trauma-
memo.pdf.
Parents or caregivers may be influencing the child by condoning or expressly supporting violent action of children, show pride in children´s undertaking of
63
violent acts or declaring their willingness to act alongside their children in perpetrating violent acts. Additionally, conductive risk factors to radicalization
include trauma, stigma, isolation, lack of opportunity, but also contact with (1) extremist associates, (2) or being exposed to extremist ideology and/or
grievances.
Emerson Cachon, The Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context, CRTG Working Group Expert Briefing Series, July 2022.
64
21

judicial review. However, State responses to concerns regarding the involvement of mothers with violent extremism,
compounding risks for child radicalization and engagement in violent acts have been diverse and non-cohesive.65
Some countries have repatriated children alongside with the mothers while other established policies for repatriation of children alone, leaving hence the
65
prosecution of mothers or primary caregivers to national courts in the region, or only orphans.
22

Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context

Semelhante a Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context (20)

Mais de Cecilia Polizzi

Mais de Cecilia Polizzi (20)

Último

Último (20)

Investigation and Prosecution of Children in a Counter-Terrorism Context