child rights baseline sri lanka 2009

Child Rights Baseline 2009 To support the Realizing Child Rights Thematic Programme Plan 2008-2011 Save the Children in Sri Lanka

1

Child Rights Baseline 2009 To Support the Realizing Child Rights Thematic Programme Plan

2008 - 2011

Dharshini Seneviratne Nirekha De Silva

in Sri Lanka


2

Save the Children in Sri Lanka 58A Horton Place, Colombo 07, Sri Lanka.

Tel: 00-94-11-2672668-74 Fax: 00-94-11-2672671/5 Save the Children in Sri Lanka, November 2009. All rights reserved. Fair use of data in this publication is permitted to promote children’s rights with proper acknowledgements to Save the Children in Sri Lanka. Cover photo: Dharshini Seneviratne


3

Contents

Acronyms - 5

Acknowledgements - 6

Executive Summary - 7

Chapter 1 – Introduction - 10

Chapter 2 – The Context - 15

Chapter 3 – Baseline Methodology - 20

Chapter 4 – Profile of Children’s Sample - 24

Chapter 5 – Children’s Participation in Governance - 29

Chapter 6 – Non-Discrimination - 48

Chapter 7 – The Best Interest of the Child - 54

Chapter 8 – Survival and Development - 61

Chapter 9 – Conclusions and Recommendations - 75

References - 79

Annex 1 – Baseline locations - 83

Annex 2 – Descriptions of baseline locations - 84

Annex 3 – Sample stratification for marginalized groups by GN division - 85

Figures Figure 4.1 Representation of marginalized groups in sample - 24 Figure 4.2 Place of residence of sample - 24 Figure 4.3 Sample disaggregated by gender - 25 Figure 4.4 Sample disaggregated by “ethnicity” - 26 Figure 4.5 Sample disaggregated by age group - 26 Figure 4.6 Sample disaggregated by age by year - 27 Figure 4.7 Sample disaggregated by schooling status - 27 Figure 4.8 Sample disaggregated by family income - 28 Figure 5.1 Levels of participation in the home - 30 Figure 5.2 Levels of participation in the school - 32 Figure 5.3 Children’s familiarity with stakeholders - 34 Figure 5.4 Children’s ability to communicate with stakeholders - 34 Figure 5.5 Children’s ability to influence decisions of stakeholders - 35 Figure 5.6 Adult stakeholder responses to child participation scenarios - 36 Figure 5.7 Extent of information received per thematic area - 40 Figure 5.8 Source of information by thematic area - 41 Figure 5.9 Membership, leadership and advocacy pertaining to children’s

organizations - 43 Figure 5.10 Nature of achievements through interface between children’s

organizations and decision-makers (no data) - 44 Figure 5.11 Opportunities for children to participate in and through media - 44 Figure 5.12 The nature of participation in the media (no data) - 44 Figure 5.13 Participation in media by type (no data) - 44


4

Figure 5.14 Nature of link through media to decision-makers (no data) - 45 Figure 5.15 Nature of achievements due to interface between children and media (no

data) -45 Figure 5.16 Children’s ability to evaluate services - 45 Figure 5.17 Children’s ability to participate in child rights monitoring - 46 Figure 6.1 Children’s perception of who is marginalized - 48 Figure 6.2 Domains where children feel marginalized - 50 Figure 7.1 Children on satisfaction with forms of care by parents/guardians - 55 Figure 7.2 Reasons for dissatisfaction with forms of care - 55 Figure 7.3 Children on nature of punishment in the home - 56 Figure 7.4 Children’s perspectives of punishment received in the home - 56 Figure 7.5 Correlation between awareness programmes and corporal punishment in

the home - 57 Figure 7.6 Types of disciplining by teachers in the school - 58 Figure 7.7 Comparison of teachers’ and parents’ use of corporal punishment - 58 Figure 8.1 Types of healthcare facilities used by children - 62 Figure 8.2 Type of medication used by children - 63 Figure 8.3 Types of food consumed by children within the past week - 64 Figure 8.4 Provision of school meals % - 65 Figure 8.5 Composition of food in the school meal by district - 65 Figure 8.6 Children’s knowledge of mechanisms to report child abuse - 67 Figure 8.7 Grade in school versus knowledge on to whom to report abuse - 68 Figure 8.8 Children by district accessing services to report abuse % - 68 Figure 8.9 Children reporting existence of awareness programmes % - 68 Figure 8.10 Awareness-raising programmes conducted by type of organization - 69 Figure 8.11 Awareness raising programmes conducted by type of organization by

district % - 70 Figure 8.12 Children’s schooling status by district % - 70 Figure 8.13 Reasons for non-schooling by district % - 71 Figure 8.14 Avenues for developing skills for school drop-outs% - 73


5

Acronyms AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

CRPO Child Rights Promotion Officer

CRAN Child Rights Advocacy Network

CS Children’s Secretariat

DCDC District Child Development Committee

DCPC District Child Protection Committee

DCRMC Divisional Child Rights Monitoring Committee

DMC District Monitoring Committee

ECDC Early Childhood Development Centre

GOSL Government of Sri Lanka

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

IDP Internally Displaced Person

INGO International Non-Governmental Organization

MCDWE Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment

NCPA National Child Protection Authority

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NSACP National STD/AIDS Control Programme

PO Probation Officer

RCR Realizing Child Rights

SDS School Development Society

STI Sexually Transmitted Infection

TPP Thematic Programme Plan

UNCRC United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

VCRMC Village Child Rights Monitoring Committee


6

Acknowledgements The principal researchers were Dharshini Seneviratne and Nirekha De Silva who conceptualized the study, monitored and guided the implementation of the study and wrote the report. The report contents was revised and edited by Dharshini Seneviratne. The report writers wish to thank Olivet Genova Alfred for coordinating the baseline and for support in training during the baseline, Aye Aye Tun, the former RCR Head, for her valuable input into the design of the baseline, Sarah Lilley of Save the Children UK for providing the initial frameworks for child rights monitoring which were adapted for the baseline and for providing comments on the report, Champa Gunasekera of Forut, and Shyamali Gnanasena of Plan International for providing input to the baseline tools and for contributing at the baseline training workshops. We wish to thank Dharmadasa Paranagama for support in designing the survey tool and sample formulation and for support in data analysis, and we specially wish to thank Asitha Punchihewa for his untiring work on the RCR baseline from the planning and implementation stage to the report-writing stage, including for providing charts and figures for the report. We thank the field research team who included Shanmuganathan Arulnathan and Yogaratnam Gopikanth in Ampara, Yoganathan Vaveethiran and Arumugam Thevatharshan in Batticaloa, Kanapathipillai Kamalathasan and Selvakumar Thakshangini in Jaffna, PLP Mithila Therani Liyanapathirana and Dinusha Lashanthi Iddagoda in Matara, Prasad Karunaratne and NS Jayaratne in Anuradhapura and Indika Premathilake and SK Don Anura Priyankara in Colombo who provided input into baseline tools and conducted the field interviews. We also thank A Rameshkanthan and Gayani Lansakaranayake from Kandy who participated in the baseline training workshop and provided input to tools, but who were unfortunately unable to participate in the baseline due to reasons beyond their control. We also thank the data entry operators Saranga Hettiarachchi and Mohomad Basith. We also thank the District Coordinators of the baseline – Thilini Patabendige from the Save the Children district office in Matara, R Maria Vithya from Save the Chidlren in Batticaloa, Ransuthamalar Nanthakumar from Save the Children in Jaffna, Subramaniam Logithan from Save the Children in Ampara, Thilaka Dharmawansa from Forut in Colombo, and U Aruna Shantha from Forut in Anuradhapura for coordinating the district baselines and sometimes functioning above and beyond the call of duty to make the baseline a reality. We also wish to thank Shanika Malalgoda from Plan International in Kandy for facilitating the pilot in Kandy, and Dashika Manuranga of Forut in Colombo for participating in the training workshop and providing input to baseline tools and methods. A very special thank you to the girls and boys from Rajasinghe Central College and Mahapathana Junior School, Panwila, Kandy and Pushpadana Balika College, Kandy, who contributed with such perception in reviewing the baseline tools. Finally, we thank Forut and Plan International for participating in the baseline process, and the European Union for funding the baseline.


7

Executive Summary

The Realizingn Child Rights (RCR) Thematic Programme Plan (TPP) is a relatively new TPP at Save the Children that is designed to strengthen civil society participation in attaining children’s rights through strengthening adults and children’s child rights networks, and strengthening the capacity of duty bearers, most importantly the State, to deliver on their obligations towards the rights entitlements of children. The primary objective of this study is to provide pre-programme (baseline) values for outcome indicators1 of Objective 3 of the RCR TPP. This indicator refers to enhancing the networking and advocacy capacities of marginalized children’s groups. The baseline also provides data on current values for the impact indicator of attainments in child rights which refers to the goal of the RCR TPP. The baseline was conducted in six districts where Save the Children, Child Rights Core Group members and the Child Rights Advocacy Network (CRAN) intend establishing Children’s Child Rights Networks. The sample consisted of 600 children and 75 adult stakeholders from state agencies and community groups from village to district level. The biases of the sample are that the locations comprise the most marginalized communities in Sri Lanka, and are, by virtue of this fact, where considerable non-governmental intervention is visible. In this sense, the sample reflects programme locations of most core members whose mandate is to work with most marginalized communities. Therefore, the data does not represent Sri Lanka as a whole, but is valuable in its ability to elaborate on the condition of most marginalized groups. The baseline offers concrete, measurable interpretations of the original TPP outcome indicators and provides some level of data on present attainment of rights by respondents (impact indicator for goal). The end-line survey of the progress made through the RCR TPP should consider using tools, methodologies and sample groups as close as possible to those of the baseline to ensure consistency and reliable measurement of progress. Chapter 1 of the Child Rights Baseline consists of a general introduction to the purpose and measurements (based on child right principles of child participation, non-discrimination, best interest and survival and development) of the baseline followed by a consideration of the general national policy and practice context in terms of child rights in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 outlines the principles, approaches and methodologies of the baseline and highlights the use of both quantitative methodologies that ensure scope, and qualitative methodologies that ensure analytical rigour. Chapter 4 outlines the general profile of children as emerging from survey data in terms of representation of marginalized groups through stratified sampling, gender, “ethnicity”, age, schooling status, place of residence and household income. Chapter 5 is the critical chapter that provides the present level of children’s informed participation in governance at community, provincial and national level, and highlights the current status of children’s familiarity, engagement and policy influencing capacity. This is with particular reference to the UNCRC principle of child participation and covers

1 Children’s perceptions on adults listening to them, of children’s confidence in participation, and participation in child rights monitoring.


8

operational and policy decisions in various domains with which children come in contact. It demonstrates children’s low decision-making powers in various domains, particularly schools and within local government structures. While 20% of children felt they were able to influence decisions at GN level, only 12% felt they could influence decisions of the VCRMC and an even lesser percentage of 5% said they could influence decisions at levels above the village. In schools, children found it harder to influence decisions at more critical/higher levels. For example, while 69% and 44% respectively said they were able to participate in decisions about teaching style and classroom arrangement respectively, only 28% and 21% said they were able to participate in establishing their own committees in schools and in influencing SDS decisions respectively. This chapter also looks at children’s access to information that affects their lives, and demonstrates significantly low levels of access to information on important yet sensitive issues of HIV/AID (11%) and reproductive health (12%). The chapter further examines children’s right to assembly, particularly through children’s clubs and child-led children’s groups, children’s ability to evaluate services they receive and the existence or non-existence of children’s participation in child rights monitoring, all factors considered key in establishing children’s meaningful participation in governance in different domains with which they come in contact. The chapter also provides concluding remarks on ways forward for the RCR TPP considering the findings. Chapters 6 and 7 highlight findings in terms of non-discrimination and inclusion, and the best interest of the child respectively, two further principles on which the UNCRC is based. The chapter on Non-Discrimination looks at the current status of non-discriminatory/inclusive practices towards different groups of children within different domains, and children highlight discrimination in terms of their economic status, caste, intellectual ability/disability, physical disability, skin colour, religion, “ethnicity”, schooling status, not having parents and gender. The highest number of responses was for discrimination based on poverty and caste. The chapter on a Child’s Best Interest looks at the care of children with a particular focus on care within the family and school. Forms of care in terms of custodial care and judicial decisions on custodial care have not been part of this baseline. Chapter 8 comes the closest in providing data against the impact indicator of the RCR TPP goal on attainments in child rights, and reflects children’s and communities’ perceptions of current attainments in terms of basic survival and development needs of access to and use of healthcare facilities, education facilities and protection mechanisms. Only 81% of the children claimed to be schooling regularly, and as many as 13.4% of children were not attending school at the time of the baseline. There were clearly lower trends in school attendance in directly war-affected areas of the North and East. This clearly demonstrates how national data on school attendance hides regional disparities. While the North and East received greater support in terms of feeding through the provision of school meals, this did not translate into a higher intake of nutritional food. The conclusions section in this chapter cautions however, that attribution of “progress” in terms of the impact indicator needs to be assigned with care as progress at this broader level of the goal would have diverse interventions that may affect change, including changes in state policies and practices that are not linked to civil society action triggered by the RCR TPP interventions in any way. Chapter 9, the concluding chapter wraps up the findings and discusses briefly the implications for advocacy on policies and practices in terms of child rights. It also outlines factors to be noted in setting up and implementing civil society and children’s


9

child rights networks and mobilizing state and community duty bearers in enabling children’s participation. It also suggests various uses of the baseline and suggests potential follow-up work for the end-line. The report highlights the low levels of children’s participation in governance, the need to strengthen interfaces between children and duty bearers at various levels, and also the need to strengthen duty bearers’ capacity and attitudes in terms of enabling children’s participation. Another key recommendation observation is that child rights practitioners should be keenly aware of all sub-national, national and international policies and conventions pertaining to children to enable use of existing provisions, and effective advocacy around gaps in policy and implementation. The report also draws attention to the manner in which national social indicators hide regional disparities in child rights attainment particularly in terms of access to basic services. It is mandatory to go through the conclusions sections of each chapter and the final chapter with Conclusions and Recommendations to obtain a fuller understanding of the key points of the report. The best guide to ease of measurement against indicators is the list of Figures which show baseline values (see Contents page for list). End-line values will have to be assessed in terms of these same forms of measurement.


10

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 The Realizing Child Rights Thematic Programme Plan Realizing Child Rights (2008-2011) is a relatively new Thematic Programme Plan (TPP) at Save the Children in Sri Lanka. It was an outcome of the 2006 Country Strategy Planning (CSP) Process in the organization and emerged out of the need for an integrated programme of which the foundation was rights-based child participation, children’s networking and creating interfaces between children, adult civil society, and duty bearers. The programme aims to create an environment for the fulfillment of children’s rights with viable and effective mechanisms and structures for monitoring and implementing child rights in Sri Lanka. The assumption behind the sector’s work is that the best outcomes and impacts for children are obtained through children’s own meaningful participation, particularly through children’s networking. The sector works in close collaboration with national and international non-governmental organizations, including through formal partnerships established with a core group comprising Forut, Plan Sri Lanka, Worldvision and the Foundation for International Training. This baseline was supported by the Core Group, and was led by the Learning and Impact Unit at Save the Children. The overall objective of the RCR programme is to improve monitoring and realisation of child rights in Sri Lanka by March 2011, benefiting at least 110,000 children. The sub-objectives are that: � By March 2011, civil society organisations will have strengthened capacity and a

platform for monitoring and advocating on child rights, benefiting at least 110,000 children in nine districts.

� By March 2011, the Sri Lankan government, particularly the Ministry of Child

Development and Women’s Empowerment (MCDWE) and other key government bodies for child rights will have improved knowledge, capacity and accountability for monitoring and implementation of child rights in Sri Lanka, indirectly benefiting approximately 10% of children in the country.

� By March 2011, at least 35,000 disadvantaged and marginalised children in nine of

the districts will have increased capacity and a platform for advocating for their own rights.

Under objective 1, the sector works in collaboration with the core group of INGOs committed to children’s participation. It is also in the process of developing a broad-based Child Rights Advocacy Network (CRAN) comprising of around 15 national level organizations as well as provincial and local level non-governmental and community-based organizations. Objective 2 refers to the role of duty bearers, be it national or local government, communities or families who are held accountable in the UNCRC for strengthening child rights, while objective 3 refers to the core of the programme – empowering children to have an influence on decisions that affect their lives. The baseline is for this objective.


11

While the impact of the project will be long-term, and perhaps beyond the lifespan of the project, what the project sets out to do is to build the foundations, and create processes and mechanisms which will ultimately allow for the final impacts of fulfilling children’s rights through children’s own organized participation. 1.2 Baseline Objectives and Indicators The current baseline study measures pre-programme values for specific objective 3 of the Realizing Child Rights TPP; i.e. By March 2011, at least 35,000 disadvantaged and marginalised children in nine districts will have increased capacity and a platform for advocating for their own rights. This objective covers the empowerment of children to voice their concerns and influence decisions that affect them. There is one goal-related impact and three objective 3-related outcome indicators for which the baseline collected data. They are: Overall Impact Indicator-

- % children surveyed in project areas who report improved fulfilment of rights e.g. access to and quality of health, education and protection services.

Outcome Indicators-

- % of children sampled in the children’s network who feel that their voices are heard at all levels and that decision-making processes have given due weight to their views;

- % children in the children’s network who report increased confidence to express

views, concerns and recommendations in a range of settings including with government officials, community leaders and with other children;

- % children in the project areas who take part in child rights monitoring and

decision making processes. As networks mentioned in the above indicators are not yet initiated, the baseline was conducted in locations where the RCR Sector at Save the Children and its partners intend to initiate local-level child rights networks. The baseline study also interprets the above indicators in more measurable ways that facilitates easier tracking of the progress of the programme against objective 3. For example, instead of measuring children’s “feelings” and “confidence levels” referred to in the original indicators, (of which the measurement is somewhat difficult, subjective, and interpretation changeable over time given the general human rights and child rights environment), the baseline measures more concrete components such as children’s actual knowledge of duty bearers, children’s actual engagement with duty bearers, the outcomes and impacts of this engagement with duty bearers, complemented by a more general, qualitative measurement of the attainment of children’s rights. The data collected in the study provides a baseline picture of the child participation, child rights networking, and general child rights environment in selected districts in Sri Lanka.


12

It is conceived that the baseline data can be applied for various uses during the programme cycle of the RCR TPP primarily to measure the progress of the study. The baseline team recommends that the tools of this study are used in its entirety in the end-line evaluation to measure the progress made through the programme, with amendments and additions where necessary. The team also recommends that the study be conducted in the same locations as those in which the original study was conducted to ensure some uniformity in respondent groups. The baseline may also be used by adult and children’s networks as a tool to monitor attainments in child rights at the local and national level.

1.3 What the Baseline will Measure The baseline will measure the process of children’s empowerment and participation and current attainments in terms of key elements of survival and development. These measurements will reflect elements of the four general principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) comprising participation, non-discrimination, best interest and survival and development. Three key aspects of measurement on children’s participation (outcome/process) are: 1. Are children able to negotiate with key duty bearers? 2. Are children able to change stakeholders’ policies and implementation practices? 3. Are adults able and prepared to enable children’s participation in governance? These will be complemented by an inquiry into further processes of non-discrimination and best interest, two more principles of the UNCRC that will be complementary to the processes outlined above. The key component of measurement of attainment of children’s rights (impact) is:

1. What are children reporting now in terms of access to quality education, protection services, health care and nutritious food?

Values derived for the impact indicator has to be considered with caution at the stage of the end-line. Attribution of attainments in child rights may or may not be a result of the RCR TPP interventions. It may, for example, be due to a nation-wide policy for children that is in no way an outcome of children’s or civil society advocacy linked to the TPP. Wherever attainments are claimed to be those resulting from children’s or civil society advocacy, this link has to be backed by solid evidence. The four UNCRC principles will be reflected in the inquiry in the following manner:

1. Child Participation (in Governance)

This principle brings out the core process elements of the RCR programme. Child participation in the baseline refers to children’s ability to participate in an informed manner at levels of family, community and school, as well as local, national and


13

international governance and in NGO/INGO programming2. Within these domains, children’s ability to participate and affect changes at the levels of

a. Decisions about law/policy/rules, b. Operational decisions,

will also be considered.

“Child participation” here is defined specifically as child participation in governance, and may differ from some prevailing definitions of child participation that include children’s participation in play, drama etc. Here, for example, pertaining to the above example of play and drama, it would be children’s ability to decide on, within given governance frameworks (ie home, school, community), their own choice of leisure and cultural activities, and not merely participation in such activities.

Children’s ability to participate in governance in a meaningful manner is also informed by their ability to organize themselves (right to assembly), their access to information, and their ability to monitor and evaluate the attainment of child rights, three more dimensions that will be addressed in the baseline.

2. Non-Discrimination

The Non-Discrimination principle refers to elements of equity in terms of treatment and resource distribution seen through prisms of gender, disability, ethnicity, age and other criteria that affect the equal treatment of all children. This covers:

1.1. Equal access to goods and services to all children irrespective of ethnicity,

religion, social status and so on. 1.2. Discrimination and resultant persecution, restriction of mobility, forms of abuse

as a result of identity. 1.3. Stakeholder sensitivity to marginalized communities in planning and

implementation. 3. Best Interest

While a child’s “best interest” in child rights discourse often takes on a predominantly legal angle, this study attempts other aspects of a child’s best interest that includes care of children within the home and community. This chapter looks at the use of corporal punishment and the availability of effective, responsive counseling services in schools. Care in institutions and judicial decisions on the best interest of the child, including inquiries based on the principal of institutionalization as a last resort are not part of this study and other documents within Save the Children may be referred to for this purpose.

4. Survival and Development

While the actual attainment of health, education and nutrition outcomes is not a part of this baseline, what it will be measuring is children’s access to critical survival and development services in terms of:

2 Based on the Dhruva concept of mainstream rights-based participation in governance.


14

a. Access for all to free health b. Access for all to free, quality education c. Access for all to nutritious food

As seen by children, communities and other key stakeholders.


15

Chapter 2 The Context

2.1 Introduction Sri Lanka is a country of a population of 20.06 million and a child (below 18) population of 5.836 million3. Sri Lanka is multi-ethnic and multi-religious with a population comprising Sinhalese (the majority), Sri Lankan Tamils and Tamils of Indian origin, Moors, and a smaller proportion of burghers and Malays. The indigenous community of veddas consist of a mere population of 2000. The country’s Sinhala-only law that prevailed until the late 70s was replaced with new language policies under articles 18 and 19 – Chapter IV of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (1978) which brought in Tamil too as an official language and English as a link language4. Sri Lanka is reported to have relatively higher social indicators than the rest of South Asia with a literacy rate of 92% (2008)5, life expectancy at birth of 756 and a student teacher ratio of 19:17. The infant mortality rate has dropped substantially from 23 per 1000 live births in 1990 to 13 per 1000 live births in 20088. These commendable achievements can be attributed to reasonable social welfare systems including a free health system and a free education system up to tertiary level, and compulsory education legislation for children up to 14 years. However, social indicators often hide geographical inequities. Moreover, data from regions directly affected by war have often been unavailable for the calculation of accurate countrywide data for social and economic indicators. Social and economic realities have also often detracted from the fulfillment of children’s rights; structural adjustment programmes have meant reduction of state support for social welfare and thirty years of militarized ethnic conflict has also meant a significantly high defense budget that detracted from expenditure on social welfare. The Supplementary Report submitted to the UNCRC Committee by the Civil Society Forum for the Supplementary Report in 2010 also points to the fallout of the global financial crisis and the recently concluded military conflict as having a negative impact on the welfare of children and communities. The report points out that in spite of social

welfare claims, 25% Sri Lanka‘s population live on US$2 a day. It also points out that Sri Lanka’s import-oriented economic practices also heighten the country’s vulnerability during financial downturns. Additionally, chronic malnutrition among children is as high as 30%9. The supplementary report further observes that “there is a need to scale up

and expand the social protection system and build new ones where none exists‟ so that children do not “bear the burden of a crisis they did not create”10.

3.Unicef Sri Lanka Statistics. 2008. http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/sri_lanka_statistics.html#63.

4 Department of Official Languages. 2010. http://www.languagesdept.gov.lk/

5 Unicef. 2008.

6 Unicef. 2008.

7 Ministry of Education. 2006. School Census 2006 Preliminary Report. Statistics Branch, Ministry of Education. http://www.statistics.gov.lk/education/SUMMARY%20TABLES%202006.pdf 8 Unicef. 2008.

9 Supplementary Report to the Third and Fourth Combined Periodic Reports of the State Party of Sri Lanka, 2009, p. 24 10 Supplementary report, p. 13


16

2.2 International and National Instruments related to Children Sri Lanka ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1991 and later, its optional protocols11. The State subsequently drafted the Children’s Charter. The Children’s Charter is a mirror image of the UNCRC except for additional clauses on respecting and protecting cultural values. The Charter, however, is not a legally binding document but a policy document meant to guide policy making and legal reform. The Government has adopted various general measures conducive to the fulfillment of children’s rights in Sri Lanka, including developing and implementing National Plans of Action for Children, amending the Penal Code for protection of children from abuse and exploitation, and creating the Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment in 2005. 2.3 National Mechanisms for Child Protection The Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment is the apex ministry addressing children’s issues. It was established in 2006 in conjunction with the year of the child with a fresh vision of prioritizing child development in national plans. The Ministry is entrusted with the duties of policy and strategy development, planning, coordination and implementation of programs on child development and empowerment of women. One of the key functions of the new Ministry is overseeing the implementation of the National Plan of Action (NPA) for Children. The Ministry is also responsible for the disbursement of NPA funds to the central and provincial Ministries tasked with carrying out the different components of the Plan12. Under the Ministry are several key agencies; namely, the Children’s Secretariat (CS) which undertakes early childhood development activities, The Department of Probation and Childcare (DPCC), which addresses issues of children without care and in contact with the law including international adoption, and the National Child Protection Authority (NCPA) instituted in 1998. The objectives of the NCPA are to aid the Government in the formulation of a national policy on the prevention of child abuse and the protection and treatment of children who are victims of such abuse, combat and control all types of child abuse throughout the country and the creation of awareness on child abuse among the public13. The NCPA, formerly an independent authority with monitoring and regulatory powers has now been placed under the Ministry, thus dissolving much of its independence. While the supplementary report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child recognizes the facilitation of coordination that this move allows for, it stresses that “the independence of the NCPA has to be maintained as it is empowered inter alia to monitor the implementation of laws relating to all forms of child abuse and to monitor the progress of all investigations and criminal proceedings relating to child abuse”14.

11 List optional protocols

12 Consideration of Third and Fourth Combined Periodic Reports Submitted Under Article 44 to UNCRC

Committee, 2008. 13 National Child Protection Authority of Sri Lanka

14 Supplementary report, p 10


17

The National Committee for the monitoring of the rights of the child falls under the Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment with the purpose of assessing the practicality and way forward of implementing the Child Rights Convention in Sri Lanka through dialogue and research15. One level of significant coordination among these various agencies was realized through Cabinet approval in 2005 to amalgamate three existing committees – District Child Protection Committees (DCPC), District Monitoring Committees (DMCs) and Early Childhood Development Committees (ECDCs), into one body: the District Child Development Committee (DCDC). This Committee consists of specified government officials drawn from different sectors as well as representatives from Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), religious leaders etc. involved in children’s affairs. Its mandate also requires it to ensure that children participate in the committee. It is anticipated that this Committee will facilitate the monitoring of all aspects in relation to the implementation of child rights in each district; and also enable the adoption of a more holistic and proactive approach to children’s issues16. The DCDCs are linked at the grassroots level to Village Child Rights Monitoring Committees (VCRMCs) and Divisional Child Rights Monitoring Committees (DCRMCs). Juvenile Justice The Children and Young Persons Ordinance enacted in 1939 is the primary document related to the administration of law related to Juvenile justice. This Ordinance applies to persons under the age of 16 years. Probation of juvenile offenders is governed by the Probation of Offenders Ordinance of 1944. The Youthful Offenders (Training Schools) Ordinance enacted in 1939 has made provision for the detention of youthful offenders (those between 16 and 22). The sentencing options available for young offenders include discharge after due admonition; delivery to parent or guardian on executing a bond that they would be responsible for the good behaviour of the offender; placing the offender on probation; an order placing the offender in charge of a fit person, approved home or certified school; imposition of fine; corporal punishment in the form of infliction of 6 strokes with a light cane for male juvenile offenders; detention during the President's pleasure in lieu of sentence of death; imprisonment in an adult prison subject to certain restrictions; conditional discharge; suspended sentences of imprisonment; and community service in lieu of imprisonment. The Child Helpline The Child Helpline, a phone-in complaints mechanism for child abuse and other children’s issues, was one novel initiative by the MoCDWE, established in February 2008. The supplementary report to the UNCRC points out that the scope of such a helpline should be expanded from a mere complaints receiving mechanism to one that offer services to children who need emotional and physical support. The report also critiques the mechanism for not being child-friendly, and for being rarely used by children themselves17.

15 Office of the United nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 1996.

16 Ibid. p. 14



18

2.4 Corporal Punishment Corporal punishment is a traditional system of punitive action against children both in the homes, in schools and other child-related institutions such as children’s homes. Corporal punishment in the home is not expressly prohibited by law, unless it causes injuries to the victim. The Education Ordinance of 1939, which permits corporal punishment for grave misconduct or habitual idleness when other methods of punishment have been tried without effect, and has not been repealed or amended in spite of such recommendations including by the NCPA and the UNCRC Committee18. The Ministry of Education Circular no. 2005/17 however states that a child should not be subjected to corporal punishment under any circumstance19. In practice, there is little monitoring of the impact of the circular and corporal punishment in schools continue. 2.5 Working Children According to the ILO20, 8% of the child population in the country is engaged in the labour market 21. A high proportion of 71% of these children engage in agriculture and 14.8% and 14.2% respectively engage in services and industries. There were 914,483 children engaged in either fulltime or part time work out of which 475,531 are below the age of 15. The major reason for children’s involvement in economic activities is poverty at the household level. Outcomes of children’s economic activity include dropping out of school and fewer social and economic opportunities22. 2.6 Family Children in Sri Lanka have been deprived of a safe and secure family environment due to multiple reasons including parental migration, parental separation, alcohol abuse and war. There is an estimated 330,000 orphaned children below 17 years of age23 (6% of the total child population). In 2006, 20,766 children were admitted to 514 child care institutions including remand homes, certified schools, receiving homes, detention home, approved school, National Training and Counseling Centre, voluntary remand homes, voluntary children’s homes. There were 18,804 children in 488 voluntary children’s homes, out of which 52 cater the children with disabilities24. 2.7 Child Participation in Governance Child participation in governance is gaining some ground at the conceptual level with both State and NGO sectors experimenting with mechanisms that enable children’s voices to be heard in decisions that affect their lives. Such initiatives include the participation of children in the design of the National Plan of Action 2004-2008, policies that stipulate children’s participation in DCDCs, VCRMCs and school mechanisms, and

18 Supplementary Report p 27


20 ILO. 2007. Sri Lanka Child Labour data Country Brief. “Results from the Sri Lankan Child Activity Survey

(SIMPOC, 1999) indicate that 17.8 per cent (0.30 million) of boys and 11.8 per cent (0.18 million) of girls ages 5-14 work, resulting in a combined total of 14.9 per cent (0.48 million) of all children in that age group working. 0.8 per cent (25,536) of children participate in the labour force without attending school. The percentage is approximately twice as high for boys (1.0 per cent) as for girls (0.5 per cent)”. 21 UNICEF: 2009

22 ILO. 2009

23 UNICEF. 2009

24 Department of Probation and Child Care. 2007.


19

state support for the formation of children’s clubs. The Children’s Clubs structures run by the State do not necessarily empower children to participate in decision-making, but there are attempts to link children’s councils to sub-national administrative structures and parliamentarians. Newer concepts, including that of the RCR TPP, of the formation of children’s networks to support taking children’s concerns to decision making forums are gaining ground particularly among the NGO sector. At the family level, children have often expressed concern of their inability to participate in family decision-making which is area that needs further work. As the Supplementary Report points out in terms of Sri Lanka’s judicial mechanisms, there are no legislative provisions requiring administrative or judicial authorities to obtain the views of the child in matters affecting his or her personal life. The only legislation that requires the consent of the child is the Adoption Ordinance which requires the consent of the child if the child to be adopted is over 10 years. In cases relating to custody and divorce, children’s views are obtained at the discretion of the judge. Sometimes, judges are reluctant to summon the child to court as they are concerned about the implications of exposing the child to an alien court environment. In instances where the child is made a party to the case, the wishes of a child of sufficient maturity are considered. The Supplementary Report points out, however, that in general there is “a failure to ensure child participation at other levels and there does not seem to be a plan to systematically apply Article 12 to legislation or policy”25. 2.8 Reproductive Health Awareness According to the National Adolescence Survey, knowledge on HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) amongst children 10-18 years is less than 45%. There were 35 cases of HIV amongst young people of the age group of 15-24 years at the end of 2004, according to the National STD/AIDS Control Programme (NSACP) of Sri Lanka. With circumstantial evidence indicating a high abortion rate, low use of condoms and contraceptives, cultural barriers and a lack of access to information on sexual and reproductive health and opportunities for skills development in families or in communities, this group of adolescents is highly vulnerable to HIV infection26. 2.9 Definition of a Child Harmonizing the definition of a child across policy and legal mechanisms has been a much-debated issue in Sri Lanka. While the UNCRC and the Draft Constitution (August

2000) Article 2227 all define a child as a person below 18 years, personal laws (minimum age of marriage in Islamic law is 12 years28), and the minimum age of criminal responsibility (8 years) invest children with responsibility/liability at a younger age. While the proposed juvenile justice reforms, which led to the drafting of the Juvenile Justice Procedure Code, propose a minimum age of criminal responsibility of 10 years, it’s yet under review.

25 Supplemtary report, p. 23

26 Supplementary Report, p. 57

27 ILO. 2009. Child Labour and Responses, overview note, Sri Lanka. International Programme on the

Elimination of Child Labour. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/region/asro/newdelhi/ipec/download/srilanka.pdf 28 Commonwealth Legal Information Institute. Sri Lankan Legal materials- Marriage and Divorce (Muslim),

Chapter 134. http://www.commonlii.org/lk/legis/consol_act/mad134294.pdf


20

Chapter 3

Baseline Methodology 3.1 Research methods

The baseline combined quantitative and qualitative research methods to ensure both scope and depth in the understanding of the current context of participation and rights fulfillment. A literature review was conducted in order to understand the current context of child rights in terms of policy and legislative mechanisms and the implementation of policies and laws as reflected in Chapter 2. Quantitative data was collected through a survey tool and qualitative data was collected through Focus Group Discussions. 3.1.1 Sample The sample of the study was from the districts of Colombo, Jaffna, Batticaloa, Ampara, Anuradhapura and Matara. The sample consisted of 600 children and 45 duty bearers representing DCDCs, VCRMCs and principals and teachers from six grama niladhari divisions within these districts considered to represent the 10% most marginalized communities in the country (Annex 1 and 2). The study adopted a multi-stage sampling strategy. The districts were selected purposively for geographic, ethnic, social and economic representation, and were also defined by whether at least one core group member was active in the district and planning child rights networking activities in the district through the RCR intervention29. Five representative villages were selected in each of the districts mentioned above for the quantitative component of the study (the survey) for which a 100 children from each village were interviewed. The sample frame included all children in the village. The sample was a random sample of children between the ages of 8-18 in each village. The sample was stratified in order to represent a reasonable number of children considered “most marginalized” i.e. urban low-income, remote rural, children living in plantation estates, non-school going and working children, street children, children reintegrated from armed groups, IDP children, children with disability and the rest comprising of children in low income households (see Annex 3). It was ensured that socio-economic, ethnic and cultural representation occurred across sample villages. For the qualitative inquiry, the children’s sample consisted of one village each of the five villages per district in the survey sample. These villages were selected through poverty mapping30. The qualitative sample was stratified by gender and age. For this component, 90 children between the ages of 8-12 and 90 Children between the ages of 13-18 formed discussion groups, comprising, altogether, 20 children per village equally divided among boys and girls. The adult sample for the qualitative inquiry was from the same villages as the children’s sample for the qualitative study. This included members of Village Child Rights

29 The baseline was implemented in the districts of Jaffna, Batticaloa, Ampara and Matara by Save the

Children, and e in Anuradhapura and Colombo by Forut. 30 Poverty mapping is a tool that helps an analysis of community poverty through the prisms of cultural,

social, economic and geographic poverty, and was introduced to Save the Children in Sri Lanka by Dhruva, the consultancy wing of the Concerned for Working Children, Bangalore, India.


21

Monitoring Committees (VCRMCs) and District Child Development Committees (DCDCs) and teachers and principals, selected due to their role as duty bearers and due to the key role they will play as the critical interface for children once the children’s child rights network is formed. The DCDC included district secretaries, (formerly known as government agents), who holds the highest district designation in terms of the Sri Lanka administrative service.31 Two key biases of the sample are as follows: 1) Children in the sample represent the most marginalized communities in Sri Lanka as the mandate of all core group members involve working with the most marginalized communities, and therefore cannot be considered a representation of the entire Sri Lankan population. 2) Most sample locations are locations where project activities have already been initiated by Save the Children or the core group members. Therefore, the baseline cannot be considered a baseline of child rights fulfillment in Sri Lanka in general. In fact, in spite of the marginalized status of these communities, the sample represents groups of communities who have been exposed to INGO and partner interventions such as initiatives which support the government mandate of setting up Child Rights Monitoring Committees at certain levels, and other community mobilization, child rights awareness and resource delivery initiatives. As a result, there is some likelihood that the knowledge of child rights concepts and engagement in activities that support the fulfillment of child rights is at least marginally higher in these localities than those without such non-governmental interventions. This does not coincide however, with a higher level of access to material and service resources accessed through state mechanisms. 3.1.2 Literature review Key documents on the rights of Sri Lankan children were studied for the contextual analysis ranging from government statistics, government and supplementary reports to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, and key child rights research. 3.1.3 Baseline tools32 The survey tool The survey tool helped gather quantitative data on key areas under inquiry i.e. children’s survival and development, participation, non-discrimination, and a child’s best interest (see chapter 1 for details and see separate document on baseline tools). A large part of the survey tool was responded to by children, but adults were asked to respond to specific sections such as on income of family. Focus Group Discussions Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) enabled bringing together children and VCRMC/VCPC and DCDC stakeholders (in separate sessions) to create a dialogue among those of each of the categories on key thematic areas of the baseline as discussed above. The FGDs further investigated the topics for which quantitative information was gathered through the survey, and also made possible a triangulation of children’s and adults’ responses in terms of child rights status. The FGDs with school

31 In terms of participation in FGDs, the district secretary from Matara and the assistant district secretary

from Batticaloa participated in the FGDs. 32 Please see separate document including all tools of the baseline.


22

teachers and principals had a specific focus on the child rights environment within schools (see separate document on baseline tools for interview schedules). FGDs with Children FGDs with children utilized child-friendly research tools that are designed to combine activity and discussion. The two key methods used were

1) The Venn diagram (for children 13-18 years of age) (see separate document on baseline tools) 2) Discussion based on cards depicting key child rights principles pictorially to generate discussion on those topics (for children 8-12 years of age and 13-18 years of age). The key principles included right to healthcare, clothing, food and shelter, education, protection from abuse, non-discrimination, participation, education, hazardous work, and a safe environment (see separate document on baseline tools)

A maxiumum of 16 children participated in each FGD. 3.2 Principals and Approaches United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child The study was based on a rights framework with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child forming the conceptual basis of the study. The UNCRC articulates the rights of the child based on the principals of participation, survival and development, non-discrimination and best interest and also includes articles on reporting against the rights which States parties have ratified and are held accountable against. The UNCRC provides a novel vision for the child that recognizes the child’s autonomy just as it recognizes the child’s developing maturity and need for special care and protection. Children, according to the UNCRC, are human beings with entitlements (rights holders) and are also participating citizens in their families and communities, with rights and responsibilities suitable to the child’s age and maturity. The rights enshrined in the UNCRC are non-negotiable and indivisible, i.e. some rights cannot be ensured without, or at the expense of, other rights. Child Participation in the Baseline Process Child participation in the baseline was practiced as far as was possible given the constraints of resources and time. Children participated in reviewing the tools of the study and provided significant inputs through presentations to the baseline team ranging from issues of sensitivity of the questions, and context in which the questions were posed. The research tools for children were based on activities and engagement to maximize children’s participation as respondents. It is the hope of the baseline team that once Children’s Child Rights Networks are established, that children will use the baseline indicators and values as a checklist for their own progress, and also help the core group improve further the indicators for tracking progress. 3.4 Research Ethics Researchers were inducted to research ethics as well as the Save the Children Child Protection and Safegaurding Policy during the training sessions.


23

The ethical guidelines ensured avoiding harm to participants, ensuring the protection of children and interviewers during the process of the study, ensuring written informed consent on participating in the study including the right to abstain from participation or answering selected questions, and ensuring confidentiality and anonymity of participants. Researchers were also trained on avoiding making unrealistic promises to participants, and accountability towards non-fabrication and falsification of data. Field Researchers were monitored by the focal points and the principle researchers to ensure they adhere to the agreed ethical standards. 3.5 Collaboration This study was designed and implemented by the Learning and Impact Unit at Save the Children in Sri Lanka on behalf of the Child Rights Core Group consisting of Save the Children in Sri Lanka, FORUT, Plan International and Worldvision. The training of baseline researchers and district coordinators was led by Save the Children’s Learning and Impact Unit and was supported by Save the Children and Core Group advisory staff. The Core Group was consulted at all stages of the baseline process and reviewed the proposal, baseline tools and the baseline report. The entire baseline team also participated in the review of tools. Children provided input to finalize tools. 3.6 Training A five-day residential training workshop was conducted for field researchers. Fourteen field researchers, seven focal persons and three senior core group members participated in the training sessions. The training workshop was led by the Learning and Impact unit of Save the Children with the support of Core Group members. The workshop included an introduction to the EU project, introduction to child rights and national and local child rights mechanisms, presentation of baseline design, an introduction to research ethics including Save the Children’s Child Protection and Safeguarding Policy and Guidelines, discussion and review of tools, developing field research skills to conduct interviews and FGDs, identification of research locations through poverty mapping for seven districts, introduction to random sampling and clarifying role and responsibilities of researchers and baseline coordinators. 3.7 Pilot

A pilot study was conducted where all the tools, except the FGD for DCDC were piloted in the DS Divisions of Doluwa and Panwila in Kandy, with children, teachers, principles and the VCPC. All tools were reviewed based on the experiences in the pilot. 3.8 Analysis Quantitative data was analyzed using an SPSS database designed by an experienced data analyst. Qualitative data was analyzed using an excel database. Analysis did not unfortunately involve children due to time and resource constraints.


24

Chapter 4 Profile of Children’s Sample

4.1. Introduction This chapter will describe the general profile of child respondents in the baseline in the random sample of a hundred children per district totaling 600 children for all six districts of Jaffna, Batticaloa, Ampara, Matara, Anuradhapura and Colombo. The stratified sampling ensured the representation of urban children (2.3%), urban estate children (16%), rural children (67.8%), rural estate children (1.8%), IDP children (3.8%), and children living in geographical locations directly affected by military conflict other than those in IDP camps (8.3%).

Figure 4.1 Representation of marginalized groups in sample

Urban

2%

Urban estate

16%

Rural

68%

Estate

2%

IDP camp

4%

War affected

8%

4.2. Children’s Household Child respondents lived mostly with one or both parents but also lived with relatives (27), in children’s homes (18), in IDP camps (5), boarding schools (2) with friends (1) and in other locations (2).

Figure 4.2 Place of residence of sample

At home with

parents

90.8%

Other

0.3%

At an IDP

camp

0.8%

At relative's

home

4.6%At a friend’s

house

0.2%At a

children’s

home

3.0%

At a boarding

school

0.3%


25

4.3. Gender The sample was not stratified for gender. Out of the 600 children interviewed, 50.8% were male and 49.2% were female.

Figure 4.3 Sample disaggregated by gender

MaleFemaleMale

Female

4.4. “Ethnicity” In the sample, 36.5% of the children identified themselves as Sinhala, 50% as Tamil, 12% as Moor/Malay, and 1.5% as Burgher33. While this does not represent national proportions of population by “ethnicity”, the locations in which the baseline was conducted were those with most marginalized communities hence a predominance of war-affected and minority communities in the sample. Even in two of the three districts where the majority was Sinhalese, the villages selected for the study constituted a significant number identifying themselves as Tamil (17.2% in Matara and 36% in Colombo) due to predominantly Tamil populations in the most marginalized urban estate34 and plantation sectors35.

33 The baseline considers ethnicity a social construct and not as an absolute form of identity. Hence, the

question posed to respondents was on which ethnicity they identify themselves with. The baseline however recognizes that ethnic identities attributed to individuals/families have a significant impact on their day to day lives in terms the fulfillment of rights and access to resources. 34 Define urban estate

35 Define plantation sector


26

Figure 4.4 Sample disaggregated by “ethnicity”

4.5. Age Of the total random sample, 60% were between the ages of 13 – 18 and 40% were between the ages of 7-12 indicating the “inverted pyramid” nature of reducing population growth in Sri Lanka.

Figure 4.5 Sample disaggregated by age group

7-12 years old

40%

13-19 years

old

60%

Sinhalese, 36.5%

Moor/Malay, 12.0%Burgher, 1.5%

Tamil, 50.0%

Sinhalese

Tamil

Moor/Malay

Burgher


27

Figure 4.6 Sample disaggregated by age by year

Figure 4.6 indicates children’s age year by year. According to the Figure, there has been a high population of children in early adolescence with a lower proportion in the lower age groups, and lower proportions in the older age brackets.

Figure 4.7 Sample disaggregated by schooling status

85% 90%

64%

77% 87%

84%

4%

0%

15%

10%

1% 2%6%

2% 10%

0% 2% 8%

5% 8% 11%

13%

10%

6%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Schooling regularly

Not schooling regularly

Not schooling

School drop outs

As figure 4.7 demonstrates, 81% of children were schooling regularly and 5.3% claimed to be schooling irregularly, (attendance less than four days a week) 4.6% were currently not schooling with the likelihood of getting back to school and 9% were drop-outs with little chance of getting back to school. Around 3% admitted to being income earners. One child respondent was married.


28

4.6. Household Income The majority of families of child respondents (45.7%) earned an income between Rs. 5000 – 9999, following by Rs. 10,000 – 24,999 (36.2%) and Rs. 2958 – Rs. 4999 (11.5%). Out of the total number of families in the sample, 2.5% were below the national poverty line of Rs. 2957.

Figure 4.8 Sample disaggregated by family income

36.20% 45.70%

11.50%

2.50%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Rs. 10,000 –

Rs. 24,999

Rs. 5000 –

Rs. 9999

Rs. 2958 –

Rs. 4999

Below Rs.

2957


29

Chapter 5 Children’s Participation in Governance

5.1 Definition of Child Participation in Governance Children’s ability to participate in decisions that affect their lives is fundamental to the fulfillment of child rights. The UNCRC defines children’s right to participation and information most directly in Article 12 (the right to freedom of expression including in judicial hearings), Article 13 (the right to seek, receive and impart information), Article 15 (freedom of association and peaceful assembly), and article 17 (access to information through mass media). All the above UNCRC dimensions were considered in the baseline. In terms of domains of participation, children’s participation was defined as children’s ability to participate in decisions in the family, community, school, local government, national and international governance, and INGO NGO programming/plans. Participation could be at the level of policy-making, planning, or at the level of operationalizing policy within any one of these domains. Both child and adult respondents were asked for information on attitudes and practices of participation in the above domains. Children’s ability to participate was inquired into through four additional prisms pertaining to the UNCRC articles:

• Access to information (right to receive information): Children’s ability to participate in decisions in an informed manner depends on access to quality, reliable and timely information about various aspects of their lives. Children’s access to information was studied in terms of their access to information on child protection, health, reproductive health, HIV/AIDS, and drug and alcohol abuse, which were selected for the study as a sample of key areas on which they required information.

• Children’s participation in children’s organizations (right to assembly): The ability for children to get together, discuss and organize themselves around issues is critical to children’s effective and representative participation. This was measured through children’s participation in children’s clubs, the dominant form of children’s assembly that prevailed. These clubs provided children with the opportunity to get together, play, study and discuss issues in confidence within the privacy and security of the club environment.

• Children’s ability to evaluate services they receive (component of a right to impart information): While this is linked to the broader participation inquiry, specific attention was given to children’s ability to evaluate services once they are received. At the highest level this would involve children formulating their own evaluation methodology, conducting evaluations, and presenting the findings to the relevant stakeholders. But as this practice is not current or not yet fully understood, children have been asked about their ability to “comment on services” during this baseline.

• Children’s participation in child rights monitoring: Official participation in the monitoring of attainment or lack of attainment of child rights is a way in which children can participate in reporting to national government and also the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child on attainments in terms of the articles of the UNCRC.


30

• Children’s participation in the media (right to impart information): Media is an important means through which children can reach a critical mass with their concerns and recommendations for solving their problems.

5.2 Participation in the Home or Living Location. The home or living location36 is the domain of participation that is usually closest to children. The information on children’s participation in the home included inquiries into child participation in decisions related to education, leisure, choice of friends, food consumption, and decisions related to alcohol use by adults. These themes were selected considering their importance in children’s lives as reflected through diverse forums.

Figure 5.1 Levels of participation in the home

10.10%

14.40%

26.10%

8.40%

22%

26.50%

22.60%

70.30%

67.90%

59.10%

51.30%

21.20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Education

Leisure

Food

Parent's

alcohol

consumption

Yes

No

Sometimes

Relative to other domains, children claimed greater ability to participate in the domain of the home. Children felt most able to participate in decisions about education, perhaps as education is accorded a high value by parents. Moreover, 16% of children quoted reasons not relevant to participation for inability participate in education in the way they want – i.e. due to family poverty or distance to schools. The next highest levels of participation were on decisions about leisure and food. Children did however mention lack of participation in the home on education issues such as that of not being able to select the subjects they want to study, or who the tuition teacher was. Decisions about leisure were more curtailed than decisions about education. The majority (30%) who commented that they could not participate in decisions about leisure said that parents did not allow them to play with children of the opposite sex, or to play with children with anti-social behaviour such as those in the habit of consuming alcohol. Children also spoke about general control of play time through which they felt constrained. In the Venn Diagram exercise, it became clear that girls

36 The living location could include a children’s institution or hostel or any other place of residence other than

with one’s own nuclear family.


31

felt more curtailed in terms of leisure activities as they were “not allowed to go to the playground” as indicated in one district. On food intake, children in hostels and institutions were specific about the institution managers deciding on types of food for meals. However, in the domain of the home and immediate family, the lack of choice of food intake was not so much related to children’s ability to participate in decisions about food so much as poverty and parents’ inability to provide children with the food of their choice. Considering the four domains of education, leisure, food choice and alcohol consumption, the highest lack of control was felt by children on decisions of alcohol consumption in the family. As many as 70% of children said their voices were not heard when they told parents to stop drinking and they felt that they did have a right to express their opinion on parents’ alcohol consumption. In Focus Group Discussions, children commented on the difficulty of participating in family discussions (they are chased away when parents discuss something), and one child said he is often told to “mind your own business without trying to be a pundit” when he tried to express an opinion. Corporal punishment was a way in which participation in the home was curtailed. However, children reported lower levels of corporal punishment in the home than in schools. But sometimes, it was intense. “They make us eat chillies, they give us hot water to drink, my aunts carry tales and get us beaten, they assault us with broomsticks…” Children also commented on forced employment by parents as a means of addressing family poverty. Early marriage was seen as another form of curtailing participation. Participation in the Home – General Findings across districts A clear trend in the findings was that in general children in Matara, Jaffna and Batticaloa claimed to have higher levels of participation in the home than children from Anuradhapura, Ampara and Colombo. Children in Anuradhapura, Matara and Colombo reported higher levels of domestic violence against them than children in Jaffna, Batticaloa and Ampara. 5.3 Participation in the School

School is a domain which is critical to children in terms of the time they spend in school, and in terms of the role schools play in inculcating academic and life skills capacities in children. It is imperative that schools have built-in structures for the participation of children at all levels to ensure that decisions are made in consultation with children. As a learning experience, this is also a means through which schools can instill in children, through practice and not preaching, the importance of collaborative decision-making. Children’s participation in the school was discussed in terms of their ability to participate in decisions about

1. The way they were taught (input to teacher)


32

2. The way the classroom was arranged (classroom management) 3. Organizing school events (event management) 4. Children establishing their own committees (child-led organization) 5. Providing input into the SDS and other school management decisions (school

management).

Figure 5.2 Levels of participation in the school

6%

19%

18%

9%

10%

25%

38%

48%

63%

70%

69%

44%

35%

28%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Teaching

style

Classroom

arrangements

Organizing

school events

Children

establishing

committees

Input to SDS

and other

school

Yes%

No%

Sometimes%

In general, children felt their ability to participate in the institution of the school was far lower than their ability to participate in the institution of family. The data in Figure 5.2 also indicates that the higher the level of participation, and therefore of challenging the authority of school institutions, the higher the possibility of curtailment of participation. For example, while 44% of children felt they were able to participate in decisions about classroom arrangements, only 28% of children felt they were able to participate in decisions about setting up their own committees, and an even lower proportion of 21% felt they were able to participate in decisions at SDS level or higher in terms of school management. This indicates a low level of institutionalized mechanisms within schools of child respondents that enable children’s meaningful participation in the use of school resources, and school management at various levels. In FGDs, children said they felt teachers were unapproachable, and felt their opinion was only sought on minor decisions such as arranging the school garden. In one case, children in Anuradhapura mentioned nominal participation in the selection of a school construction site, where the children’s decision was overridden by the principal “in consent”. This is a clear example where schools may demonstrate mechanisms for “consulting” children but where the actual decisions are made elsewhere. This also raises concerns over consultations without proper mechanisms to implement children’s ideas and opinions. Children strongly felt teachers did not see them as capable of decision-making due to their status as children.


33

Children also spoke of the link between corporal punishment and ability to express opinion within the school. As one child said, “If we say what we think, they beat us”. And teachers often firmly rationalized corporal punishment. According to one teacher, “we hit children only if they do something wrong. We do not punish them because we get angry. We punish them to mould them into good citizens. We hit children because we love them”. One teacher went as far as to say, “I feel that stopping corporal punishment was the biggest mistake. Without punishment, you cannot mould a child. As long as corporal punishment is rationalized in this manner, there is a likelihood that children’s meaningful participation in schools will not be a reality. Participation in School – General Findings Across Districts There were no clear district-specific trends in terms of participation in the school, and beating in the schools were high in all districts with children in Ampara and Batticaloa claiming to face the highest level of corporal punishment from teachers (80% and 83%) respectively. 5.4 Participation in the community/local governance Local government could be considered the third level at which children could potentially participate. Children’s opinions on planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation of local government activities could be critical in mainstreaming children’s interest into local government policies, plans and practices, in providing basic services of particular relevance to children, and even in changing attitudes of local government authorities to children and disadvantaged communities, including attitudes about their participation in local government decision-making Children’s ability to participate in local governance was discussed in terms of

1. Children’s familiarity with local government officials and mechanisms at village level. Familiarity was defined by whether children “knew” the local government official or agency.

2. Children’s sense that they could interact with local government officials and mechanisms. Interaction was defined as children’s ability to meet and speak to officials individually or in groups.

3. Children’s comments on whether they have directly or indirectly influenced decisions of local government and mechanisms. “Influencing decisions” are defined as the way in which children’s inputs change a local government policy, plan or practice.


34

Figure 5.3 Children’s familiarity with stakeholders

68%

14%

14%

32%

86%

86%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100

%

Children know the GN

Children know CRPO

Children know government officers

higher than at village level

Yes

No

On familiarity with stakeholders, 68% of children said they knew the grama niladhari, but only 14% said they knew the child rights promotion officer and a similar percentage of children said they knew officials higher than at village level. The grama niladhari is generally in close proximity to the children due to his/her presence in the village, whereas the CRPO, critical to ensuring child rights attainment in communities represents an entire DS division which could contain between 200 - 400 villages, and is as distanced from children as officials higher than at village level. In this sense, the grama niladhari comes out as an ideal conduit for taking issues from children to other stakeholders.

Figure 5.4 Children’s ability to communicate with stakeholders

33%

17%

7%

13%

61%

80%

84%

85%

6%

3%

9%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100

%

Children communicate with GN

Children commuicate with

government officers higher than

at village levelYes

No

Sometimes


35

Figure 5.5 Children’s ability to influence decisions of stakeholders

20%

12%

5%

79%

85%

92%

3%

1%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Influenced

decissions at

GN level

Influenced

decissions at

VCPC/VCRMC

Influenced

decissions at

levels beyond

the village level

Yes

No

Sometimes

While 68% children admitted to “knowing” the grama niladhari, only 33% said they had interacted with the grama niladhari, and an even lesser percentage of 20% said they could influence the decisions of the grama niladhari, even though the nature of this influencing was not evident. Clearly, personal interaction of a mere 33% is quite sufficient if there was a clear system of representation for children to take their concerns to the GN, but no such systems were yet in evidence during the time of the baseline. In the Venn diagram exercise indicating importance and proximity, the grame niladhari was considered “less important” and distant in some instances, and very important and distant in others. Considering the GN less important indicates lack of knowledge of the pivotal role the GN can play in being a mediator between children and stakeholders at a higher level such as the Divisional Secretariat, Department of Probation and Childcare and Education Departments. It is only in the Matara district that the GN was considered as both “important” and “close” to the children and children said he “efficiently” carried out his duties. Around 17% of children said they could communicate with the CRPO. This conflicts with data that says only 14% knew the CRPO. The findings of the Venn diagram exercise also indicate that children across districts felt the CRPO was “important” but “distant” except for occasional contact through children’s clubs in two districts. There was a clear disparity between children who “knew’ officials of certain mechanisms, and those who felt they were actually able to influence decisions of mechanisms these officials represented such as the grama niladhari office (20%), village child right monitoring committee (12%), and mechanisms above village level (5%). What exactly these decisions were had not been articulated in the survey.

The findings indicate children’s lack of access to governance forums higher than village level including at divisional, district and national level, levels which still have considerable influence over decisions made at village level. In the Venn Diagram exercise, children in one district indicated that while the services of the divisional secretariat office was important, obtaining these services were very difficult. National decision-making and legislative bodies such as parliament were very distant from children and children did not see a relationship between parliament and their own lives which has an implication on participatory and consultative national governance.


36

Children felt that the children’s clubs run by government and NGOs were a forum through which they could express their ideas, but also noted that some parents did not allow children to participate in children’s club activities. By and large however, children’s clubs were seen as spaces where children “developed skills, learnt about living, did sports activities, and attained a general knowledge”. An idea or practice of a children’s club as an interface between children and stakeholders was very low. Perhaps this is one reason why children’s clubs were seen as “less important” and “far” in the Venn diagram exercise in most districts. NGOs were seen as one key entity that actively “consulted” children on their concerns which indicates a need to strengthen consultative mechanisms within state agencies. Children’s Participation in Community and Local Government – General Findings Across Districts The lowest percentage of children who knew the GN were from Anuradhapura and Colombo (50% and 52%). In an interesting twist, a larger proportion of children in Colombo claimed to know the Child Rights Promotion Officer (39%) and felt the CRPO listened to them (30%) than in other parts of the country in which the baseline was conducted. This is probably because of the proactivity of the particular CRPO or because the NGO engaged with this community is paying special attention to link children with the CRPO. In other parts of the country, the percentage of children claiming familiarity with the CRPO ranged from 3% - 17%. Concomitantly, children in Colombo also felt they were able to participate in the decisions of the VCRMC more than children in other districts (19%). Ampara also demonstrated higher ability to influence decisions of VCRMC but this ability was reported to be low in other regions (1% - 15%). The ability to influence decisions of officials higher than at village level were consistently low. 5.6 Adults on Child Participation Adult attitudes and perceptions of child participation are fundamental to the way in which policies and practices around child participatory mechanisms are framed. Adults in the domains of school, local government and community groups were asked to comment on their opinion on child participation at various levels (operational, policy) within their domains and also comment on children’s actual participation in these domains. Considering the novelty of the concept of child participation in governance to many stakeholders, different scenarios were provided to enable deliberation so that discussions were based on concrete suppositions.

Figure 5.6 Adult stakeholder responses to child participation scenarios Would you Approve? Does this happen?

The Domain of School

Scenario 1: A teacher in your school requests her students to evaluate her teaching.

While opinion varied, most teachers felt this was not suitable. Teachers and principals in Batticaloa and Ampara were more comfortable with the idea. Some teachers and principals felt this would be unproductive as children would hesitate to be critical about a teacher due to fear of reprisals. In Matara, teachers felt that children were not knowledgeable enough to evaluate their teacher.

This was not reported to be practiced except in Anuradhapura.


37

Scenario 2: Children decide who the chief guest is at this year’s sportsmeet

Most teachers and principals did not approve of this idea. They felt children did not have the maturity to decide on a chief guest, and in one FGD location teachers said children were “frogs in a well” and did not have enough knowledge to make such decisions. In Matara, teachers felt there was a “possibility” of this being a good idea, but suggested collective decision-making on such matters between teachers and students. There was a clear social status bias in one district where teachers said “it’s not important to take the view of children from a village like this” which has implications for non-discriminatory practices within the school. Teachers and principals in Batticaloa and Jaffna felt this was acceptable.

This has not taken place in most locations except in Battcaloa where A/L students have been part of the selection committee for deciding on the chief guest.

Scenario 3: Your school has received funds for the construction of a building after a natural disaster in your district. Children participate with adults in deciding the location, plan and manner of construction.

There was a divide among teachers and principals on children’s participation in decisions about building construction. Some felt children did not have enough knowledge about these matters, but others felt it is important to obtain children’s input on this. Some others felt that even teachers and principals did not have the opportunity of participating in such decisions which were taken by the Department of Education. Some felt input on certain reasonable matters could be approved.

Has not happened.

Scenario 4: Children decide to meet the principal about highlighting the school circular against corporal punishment and requesting that the school puts an end to corporal punishment.

The responses were divided. In about four districts teachers felt this was acceptable, but with reservations. Some felt this was a practically difficult thing to do, and others felt this would result in children losing respect for teachers, and losing “fear” of teachers. Others felt this kind of practices will make children lose interest in academic work. Yet others felt this was not suitable and saw beating children as “rational” if it was to “correct” a child. Some interesting comments came from Matara where teachers said this was irrelevant as children were not beaten in their school not because it was wrong, but due to fear of reprisal from angry, and often violent, parents. The teachers’ motto: “even if thunder strikes your [parents’] children, we do not care”. This attitude was clearly linked to the “lower” social and economic status of children in this school.

This kind of advocacy by children with principals on implementing school level policies has not taken place.


38

The Domain of Community – VCRMC

Scenario 1: Children in your community express a wish to participate in the meetings of the VCRMC as active members.

Most in the FGD felt this was suitable as children were sensitive to their own problems. However, in Jaffna, participants felt children had their own forums such as the children’s clubs and therefore did not need a forum in the VCRMC.

This does not happen in the FGD locations except in Batticaloa. Even when this participation did occur, it did not ensure effective representation of all children’s issues in the VCRMC as mechanisms for consultation with all children were weak. The government circular on VCRMCs however stipulates at least 40% children’s participation in these committees.

Scenario 2: The VCRMC has decided to identify the most vulnerable children in the village through a survey. Children’s participation in this exercise as surveyors.

General opinion was that this is acceptable as children know the issues of their peers best.

No, it does not happen. In Batticaloa, the national phone-in service for reporting child abuse was considered one way in which children “participate” in identifying themselves and others as vulnerable. In other areas, the VCRMC was a channel through which children reported cases of abuse. Actual participation in such a survey was not reported. The FGD itself was a place in which participants realized the importance of this form of collaborative research with children.

Scenario 3: The Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment is organizing a national conference on children. Children’s participation in the conference planning committee.

This is considered suitable, as this will help develop children’s leadership qualities, and as children are the ones who are able to stand up to their own rights.

No such participation yet.

Scenario 4: A new National Plan of Action for Children is being prepared by the Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment. Children have sought permission to participate in preparing this Action Plan.

There was a general consensus that this is acceptable, and that children should be stakeholders in making decisions that affect them. However, in Anuradhapura, the observation was made that parents’ own ambitions for children such as academic excellence made parents discourage children from participation in activities other than school work.

Has not happened so far in location where FGDs were held. Stakeholders in these marginalized districts felt that even if children are invited, it would not be children from these locations, as they were not from influential social backgrounds. A clear link between social class and ability to participate is indicated here.

Scenario 5: A National Education Policy is being prepared by the Ministry of Education. A children’s network in once district has expressed their wish to participate in the formulation of this policy.

Mostly, teachers and principals approved of this participation. In fact some felt this was “compulsory” and that teachers and principals would provide the fullest corporation if this was to take place. They felt children had the best perspectives of education and that they would gain confidence through such

Only participants in the FGD in Colombo acknowledged that this has taken place and they said children are sensitive to their own circumstances and that these should be reflected in policy. This also perhaps indicates a correlation between geographical location of children in proximity to national seats of


39

processes. In Matara however, teachers felt that children in that location were “not suitable” to participate in such decisions.

decision-making and their ability to participate.

Domain of Local Government – DCDC

Scenario 1: Children in your community express a wish to participate in the meetings of the DCDC as active members. A unanimous yes in all districts. Not practiced in spite of the fact that the DCDC

mandate requires such participation. In fact, the DCDC did not function at least in one district - Colombo.

Scenario 2: The DCDC has decided to identify the most vulnerable children in the district through a survey. Children’s participation in this exercise as surveyors.

A unanimous yes. Not taking place. Jaffna mentioned a “complaints box” in the village that children are not aware of, which therefore makes the mechanism irrelevant to children.

Scenario 3: The Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment is organizing a national conference on children. Children’s participation in the conference planning committee.

Seen as acceptable in most cases. Some felt children would miss schooling and therefore should not participate in such things.

Does not happen.

Scenario 4: A new National Plan of Action for Children is being prepared by the Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment. Children have sought permission to participate in preparing this Action Plan.

Seen as suitable. Some felt that there could be mediation between children and the planning process through school opinion boxes etc. without children’s direct involvement.

Has happened during the planning of the NPA 2004-2008. However, some attempts at consultation such as children’s parliaments were seen by DCDC members as not leading to action, and therefore unproductive.

The responses of different adult stakeholders reflect more or less the same trends that came out in the survey and FGDs with children on children’s perception of adult attitudes. School personnel were far more resistant to children’s participation within the structure of the school than representatives of VCRMCs and DCDCs (which in fact stipulates children’s participation through government circulars). This may be due to the regimented structure of schools that inhibit the perception of children as equal partners in education. The challenges faced through children’s participation and the threat to the security of the status quo may also be felt as greater in schools than in other domains due to the fact that other domains (except the family) do not face the implications of children’s presence and opinions as much as schools. Due perhaps to the restrictions on participation in terms of attitude and practice demonstrated in schools, children from these low-income communities often resorted to indirect forms of participation which were not conducive to developing positive teacher-student relations. As a teacher from Matara said, “If children pulled the valve of your bicyle tire, then you can be sure they have some problem”. This anti-social behaviour is a direct outcome of the broad observations made throughout the study that adults, specially in the home and school felt children’s opinions were not worthy of consideration. Among other stakeholders, there was more openness to the possibilities of children’s participation in the various scenarios, but actual participation in areas such as those in


40

the scenarios were low. Other than adults own negative attitudes towards enabling participation of children from low-income groups, adults felt that marginalized children were left out because of social status, irrespective of adult attitudes towards this participation (see above chart on influential children participating in national forums). The primacy given to mainstream education and examinations over other activities through which children may develop their personalities and fulfill their own rights also meant children were discouraged from participating in other activities outside of the school. According to a set of DCDC members “[parents] think children have to spend every possible minute on education”. 5.7 Access to information

Access to reliable and current information is important to enable children to participate in decision making in an informed and confident manner. Often, in the 10% most marginalised communities in which the baseline was conducted, this access is weak due to poor access to information technology and low-income status. Lack of children’s access to facts and policy information prevents children from articulating their needs in terms of policies and services available to them and seriously reduces demands of accountability from stakeholders.

Figure 5.7 Extent of information received per thematic area

33%

46%

11%

12%

40%

42%

19%

25%

27%

12%

69%

61%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Child

Protection

Health

Reproductive

health

HIV/ AIDS

Fully

Partly

None

The highest number indicating full access to information was in the area of health (46%) as seen in Figure 5.7, possibly because of the relatively well-spread health structures and personnel who engage with children in communities and in schools. The most significant finding requiring attention is that 69% and 61% children respectively claim no access whatsoever to information on the critical subjects of reproductive health and HIV/AIDS. This is also significant since reproductive health and issues of sexually transmitted infection are taught subjects in higher secondary schools37. This is seen as largely due to parents’ and teachers’ culturally and socially ingrained reluctance to discuss issues of sexuality with children. According to DCDC members in Jaffna,

37 Even if you do acknowledge the fact that 40% of the respondents were below 12 and may not have

access to information on reproductive health and AIDS through schools, the proportion who do have access is still low. Moreover, considering the possibility of sexual activity of very young children, this knowledge becomes relevant to younger age groups as well.


41

resources provided to teachers to educate children on reproductive health such as Malarum Yauvanam (Enligthening Youth), is not even taught in schools. “Children do not have the facilities to know about contraceptives and about drug abuse … the attitudes of teachers and elders have to change”, according to one DCDC member in Jaffna. The implication here is that DCDC members do feel that discussion of issues such as contraception is relevant to potentially sexually active teenagers. The DCDC also put the onus on Departments of Health to ensure that this happens. A large proportion of children in the districts of Anuradhapura (42%) and Jaffna (61%) claimed that they had no access whatsoever to information on child protection, and children in Anuradhapura had the lowest access to information on health with 40% claiming never to have received any health information whatsoever. The highest proportion saying they never receive information on reproductive health was from Batticaloa (95%), Jaffna (73%) and Anuradhapura (69%). The district of Anuradhapura had particularly low access to information overall. That information does not reach all children is also a matter of concern considering that all children have an equal right to access to information.

Figure 5.8 Source of information by thematic area

Child protection

Health

Rep/v health

HIV/AIDS

Alcohol/drugs

Average %

Television % 33 24 8 22 23 22 Newspapers % 8 6 7 8 6 7 Radio % 4 2 18 10 2 7 Posters % 9 11 4 10 22 11 School % 23 42 28 30 26 30 Family % 5 4 3 1 7 4 Friends 0 0 1 1 1 .6 Video % .3 0 1 .26 Mobile Phone % .3 0 0 .06 Community meetings %

1 .5 0 3 .9

Organizations % 5 1 1 3 3 3 Books % 8 8 26 13 7 12 Other % 3 2 6 2 1 3

Schools (average of 30%) Television (22%) were the channels through which children received most of their information, followed by books (12%) posters (11%) and radio (7%). Books were a relatively important source of information for sensitive subjects such as reproductive health about which both parents and teachers were reluctant to speak to children about. A critical demonstration of this reluctance is that only 28% of children claimed to have access to reproductive health information from schools in spite of the


42

subject being part of the mainstream higher secondary syllabus. (This may be partially due to the fact that younger children were part of this survey, yet the percentage is low). While books were relatively more important for sensitive subjects, it is noteworthy that in some Venn diagram exercises, children indicated that the library was an “important” place, but that it was not accessible. It’s interesting that a channel as low-cost and effective as radio was not used optimally in communities (whether this is an issue of radio programme content or use of radio is not clear) where more expensive sources such as television may not be so accessible. It is also interesting that family was not a critical source of information, most probably due to family poverty and different priorities of parents in the absence of awareness on the link between access to information and attainment of rights and poverty alleviation. Family reluctance to deal with issues such as reproductive health was also clear. Where reliable information is not available, children resort to unreliable sources for information which provides distorted information and reiterate myths that are harmful to children. While NGO action in providing information was acknowledged, access to such information was till limited due to lack of facilities which meant most of the information produced was not accessed nor understood by children. Lack of awareness on issues such as AIDS has a critical implication for a country which has gone through two large-scale emergencies in the past five years, is proximate to countries with high prevalence rates coupled with high migration and refugee rates in the past. The “invisibility” of the subject in public discourse and school discussions hides the potential harm that can be created through this very silence. 5.8 Children’s organizations Children’s organizations are an important means through which children interact with each other. Children’s organizations, predominantly known as children’s clubs38, are represented largely by clubs run by both the government’s CRPOs and Non Governmental organizations. In the mainstream and traditional definition of a children’s club, they are a channel through which children meet, play and have access to library facilities. There is, however, an emerging definition that is gaining ground particularly in the NGO sector that sees children’s organizations as the link between children and decision-makers. A critical role of the RCR TPP is to transform existing children’s clubs into more advocacy-oriented children’s groups with skills and information to speak about and advocate for issues that affect their lives. Child-led children’s organizations are considered to be preferable to adult-led children’s organizations as this minimizes the possibility of adults co-opting the agendas of children’s clubs, and also increases children’s ownership of clubs and enhances their leadership qualities and self-confidence in carrying out the mandate of the club, whatever its mandate is. Once more, a role that the RCR TPP will play is one that will encourage increased ownership and running of organizations by children themselves.

38 Children’s clubs are predominantly associated with activities such as play and study rather than advocacy.

Many prefer the term “organization” to refer to children’s groups that engage in advocacy.


43

Figure 5.9 Membership, leadership and advocacy pertaining to children’s organizations39

12.70%

61%

26.30%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Are you a member of a

children's organisation?

Are you a member of a

children's organisation initiated

and led by children?

Do Children's organisations act

as a conduit to decission

makers?

Yes

No

Don't know

Only 26% of the children in the respondent group claimed to be part of a children’s club. Children were clear about the benefits of children getting together to discuss their problems. “By forming children’s groups, you can guide children in a proper manner and also by listening to their opinion and point of view, you will be able to provide solutions to their problems”. Within this specific baseline, no reliable survey data was gathered on membership in a child-led organization, or on children’s clubs acting as a conduit to decision-makers. These are considered forms of data to be gathered at the end-line stage. For the moment, qualitative data indicates that there is no concept of children initiating and leading their own organizations. Adults and children were made to understand the difference between regular children’s clubs, and child-led children’s groups. Subsequently, adults observed that children themselves are not made to understand the importance of child-led organizations. Even where there was a will to initiate such processes, there was a lack of know-how in initiating them, as noticed by district level officials. “Children do not have the facilities and the knowledge to form their own organizations, and children cannot obtain the support of parents and the community for this”. The excessive pressure put on children by a demanding school examination system also precluded children’s participation in initiating and implementing activities that bring children together: “Since children spend most of their time on studies, they are not interested in this”. Children’s participation through children’s clubs was limited to decisions about dance performances, trips and other such activities. While these are important elements where children decide on the agenda of clubs, there was little evidence that the clubs acted as a mediator between children and duty bearers.

39 While the second question was posed, differing understandings of the question has made the answers

irrelevant. As the qualitative data indicates the absence of actual child-led children’s organizations, the

value for the “yes” maybe confidently considered a zero. The third question was not asked and should be

part of midlines and end-lines of the RCR TPP.


44

Figure 5.10 Nature of achievements through interface between children’s organizations and decision-makers40

Nature of Achievement %

Increased facilities in the village ND Increased access to education ND Increased child protection ND Etc ND

5.9 Participation in the media Children’s participation is significantly enabled through their ability to participate in the media which can be an effective channel through which to communicate with decision-makers. It further holds decision makers accountable because of the “mass” nature of media, which could create automatic public awareness on issues that children are raising.

Figure 5.11 Opportunities for children to participate in and through media Yes% No% NA% Do children have opportunities to participate in mass media? 29 53 18 Do media act as a conduit for children to reach decision-makers?

41 ND ND ND

Only 29% of children felt children have opportunities to participate in the mass media, or through the mass media. While there is no current baseline data for media acting as a conduit for children to reach decision-makers, qualitative data indicates this as being low. It is proposed that this is a question that is included in the end-line evaluation of the RCR TPP.

Figure 5.12 The nature of participation in media Nature of Participation %

As interviewers/presenters/writers

ND

As interviewees ND Through phone calls/letters/email

ND

Figure 5.13 Participation in media by type

Type Yes% No% NA%

Radio ND ND ND Newspaper ND ND ND Television ND ND ND Internet ND ND ND Community wallpapers ND ND ND School wallpapers ND ND ND Posters ND ND ND

Data indicated in Figures 5.12 and 5.13 were not collected during the baseline, or collected information was not reliable. It is felt that it is too premature at this early stage of network formation to collect informed responses on such matters, and it is once again

40 This was not a part of the current baseline but qualitative data indicates a low value. The end-line study of

the RCR TPP should consider this. 41 Not a part of the baseline and should be included in the end-line.


45

recommended that these be included in the end-line evaluation of the progress of the RCR TPP.

Figure 5.14 Nature of link through media to decision-makers Nature of Link %

To local government ND To national government ND To international bodies ND

Figure 5.15 Achievements due to interface between children and media

Nature of Achievement %

Increased facilities in the village ND Increased access to education ND Increased child protection ND Other ND

While the above values could potentially be a significant measure of children’s activism, at this stage of the baseline, the values are insignificant or zero. It is imperative that the above are incorporated into the end-line study of the RCR TPP. 5.10 Evaluating Services All service providers, whether governmental or non-governmental, need to enable children to express their opinions on services they deliver. While a full understanding of children evaluating services may not be possible here, some indication exists of children’s ability to comment on services they receive.

Figure 5.16 Children’s ability to evaluate services

30.90%

32.30%

17.40%

30%

40.80%

24.60%

39.60%

26.90%

58.10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Non

Governmental

Organisations

Government

Services

School

Yes

No

Don't know

In contradiction to the findings on decision making, children reported the highest level of ability to evaluate services in schools. It is not clear if this was a misunderstanding of the question as there was no qualitative data to corroborate this. Around 40% of children considered it possible to evaluate the services of non-governmental organizations perhaps through formal evaluation of programmes that is a requirement of most NGO programmes. Only 29% of children felt that they were able to evaluate government services, and only 21% said they were able to evaluate community organizations, probably because such mechanisms were not in place.


46

5.11 Participation in Child Rights Monitoring Child rights monitoring here refers to children’s active participation in the formal child rights monitoring mechanism set up by the National Committee for the Monitoring of Child Rights. This mechanism has representation at the village level through Village Child Rights Monitoring Committees that are meant to report to Divisional Child Rights Monitoring Committees who report to the District Child Development Committee who finally reports to the national body. Child rights are meant to be monitored based on the articles of the UNCRC as reflected in Sri Lanka’s Children’s Charter. Figure 5.17 Children’s ability to participate in child rights monitoring Yes% No% Don’t

Know%

Participation in child rights monitoring 7 51 42

This indicates a very low figure for child rights monitoring and getting involved in monitoring attainment of child rights against the Articles of the UNCRC. It has implications for the proper functioning of child rights monitoring committees who are invested with the role of watchdogs of service providers. 5.12 Conclusions Our cultures are clearly not those that automatically encourage children’s participation. The data amply demonstrated resistant attitudes and a lack of actual participation on certain subjects (parents’ alcohol consumption, children’s voices on corporal punishment in schools), and in certain domains (particularly the school). A rift was also seen between policy and practice. Participation was often actively curtailed because of adult authority, and was more curtailed on issues where the adult status quo was more challenged. There was also a correlation between attitudes towards certain social groups, and attitudes towards their participation. Children of low-income groups were often considered “unworthy” of participation. Participation was indirectly curtailed due to the assumption that children’s engagement in such activities would harm their education, a specific parental aspiration. There is some evidence that adults were more resistance to participation in domains in which adults interacted with children more closely such as in the home, and in schools. Here, the implications of children’s rebellion and “stubbornness” have been far more evident than in other domains where children’s presence and participation are relatively weaker. The findings also indicate a lack of know-how in encouraging children’s participation, and in developing state and non-state mechanisms at local level that encourage children’s participation. While VCRMC and DCDC circulars stipulated children’s participation, very few conscious efforts were observed in local level to implement such policies and involve children in key decision-making forums. This may be seen as a lack of awareness of the importance of this involvement even more than adults wishing to maintain authority. Access to information was low, particularly on critical issues such as reproductive health and HIV/AIDS. Even where policy stipulated that this knowledge should be imparted to children, as in the domain of the school, teachers’ reluctance to handle subjects that deal with sexuality curtailed teaching and discussion of these subjects. Generally too,


47

there was low access to information due to lack of resources, and the lack of awareness on the link between information and poverty alleviation/empowerment. Some of the concepts dealt with in this section of the inquiry were quite novel to most respondents, such as child-led children’s organizations, children evaluating services, and children participating in child rights monitoring. Therefore, where questions were often set on these for the baseline, the data indicated a confusion about the question being asked, and has therefore been left out. Where survey data has been inadequate on this kind of complex issues, the baseline team relied on qualitative data that indicated an almost zero value for some elements such as those mentioned above. It is imperative that clear questions suggested within the chapter are utilized in the end-line of the RCR TPP. In general, the findings indicate that interventions should focus on areas where children report the most resistance to participation i.e. on themes such as alcohol consumption. The domain of the school is one which would need critical attention in developing children’s ability to participate due to the greater levels of resistance demonstrated by teachers and principals, over other stakeholders, in enabling children’s participation. Developing a culture that encourages children’s participation needs a proactive and holistic approach that takes on the transformation of attitudes, policies, mechanisms, and practices to encourage such systems. It is the challenge of the RCR TPP then to take on this gamut of implications on, through the support of staff with a keen awareness of concepts of governance and participation through engagement in strong, sensitive and sustained community mobilization that ensure the creation and sustenance of positive attitudes, policies and practices in child participation. This not only requires the mobilization of children, but also capacity building of adult stakeholders around attitudes and mechanisms that allow children’s participation.


48

Chapter 6 Non-Discrimination

6.1 Introduction

A sense of equality and inclusion is fundamental for children to develop self-esteem, confidence and to participate in community and governance. However, children are often explicitly or tacitly discriminated against for a multiplicity of reasons.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child requires, in Article 2, that the rights entailed in the articles of the UNCRC applies to all children irrespective of the child’s, or the parents’ or legal guardian’s race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status. The article also requires that children are not discriminated against on the basis of the status, activities, opinions or beliefs of the child’s parents, legal guardians or family members. Children could also be discriminated against by virtue of the fact that they are children.

The data below could be helpful in strategizing to end discrimination through policy and practice, and in ensuring inclusion in designing and implementing children’s networks, and children’s representation.

6.2 Children’s Perceptions of Marginalized Children’s Groups

This question provides children’s own sense of those among them who are discriminated against in their communities and may reflect the respondents’ own experience, or the experience of peers. Discrimination here is observed in terms of “ethnicity”, religion, caste, family, disability, personality, personal hygiene, intellectual ability, social behaviour and appearance.

Figure 6.1 Children’s perceptions of who is marginalized

Category % out of total respondents

Total number of responses

Poor children 50 79 Caste groups 11 18 Children with learning impairments 11 17 Children with disability 6 10 Non-school going children 6 10 Children with “bad habits” 4 6 Unclean children 3 4 Orphans 3 4 Dark children 2 3 Children from minority ethnic groups 1 2 Children from certain religions 1 2 Children with low confidence 1 2 High aptitude children .6 1

Only 158 children out of 600 responded to this question. The low response rate could possibly be due to the novelty of the concept of non-discrimination to these communities


49

and due to the poor understanding of the question, in spite of the surveyors’ attempts. However, the analysis here needs to consider even one single child’s observation as pertinent as it would represent the circumstance of a larger proportion of children than those responding above. Therefore, each of the groups of children mentioned above need to be taken into consideration in addressing non-discriminatory policies and practices and in planning inclusive networking for children. Poverty stands out as a critical cause for discrimination as seen by children (79 out of 158 children). The highest number of responses for poverty as a reason for discrimination was from Anuradhapura and Matara in the southern part of the country. Children’s caste identity was seen as a relatively serious form of discrimination by the next highest number of children (18). Caste was considered a reason for discrimination in Jaffna (19%), Ampara (19%) and Batticaloa (14%) in the North East of the country. Next in line came children with learning impairments (11%) and children with disability (6%). Learning impairment could be a reference to conditions such as dyslexia which often go unnoticed in the classroom and which results in admonition and perhaps corporal punishment by teachers, and bullying by peers. A very small proportion also noted discriminatory attitudes towards children with high learning aptitudes even though there was no qualitative data to corroborate this. The consideration of children from minority groups as marginalized came from Anuradpapura and Batticaloa, one a majority Sinhala area, and the other an area with populations of a majority of Tamils and Moors. No further data was available from qualitative discussions. It is interesting that “dark children” were considered marginalized by three children in Ampara, indicating values placed on appearance that may jeopardize opportunities open to children. Three of the causes for discrimination observed by children above are to do with the domain of school. The rest were mostly forms of discrimination in the community. Qualitative data however brought out issues of discrimination in the family as well.

6.3 Domains of Marginalization

Particular groups of children are marginalized in specific domains, be it family, community, school, or other. The domains of discrimination were pre-determined in the survey questionnaire based on some domains considered in the participation chapter, as well as certain more specific domains of discrimination consistently highlighted by children in Save the Children’s consultations with children. Responses could refer either to access to certain domains/service provision, or discrimination within these domains/service provision.


50

Figure 6.2 Domains where children feel marginalized

1%

3%

3%

11%

12%

12%

12%

16%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Other

In getting reported abuse problems solved

In accessing mechanisms for reporting harm

In education institutions

In obtaining birth certificates

In accessing recreational facilities

In accessing health care facilities

In accessing computer and IT facilities

Almost all children have answered this question. Positive responses in percentages are shown above in descending order. The above Figure indicates that children felt they were unable to access the facilities mentioned due to one or more reasons in Figure 6.1. The highest sense of discrimination was felt in accessing IT facilities (16%) followed by discrimination in accessing healthcare42 (12%), recreational facilities (12%) and obtaining birth certificates (12%) followed closely by accessing education facilities (11%). Chidlren in Ampara (23%) and Jaffna (17%) reported discrimination within recreational facilities, and Matara (31%), Jaffna (24%) and Ampara (17%) reported discrimination in accessing IT facilities. The highest rates of marginalization in reporting harm was from Matara followed by Jaffna, and on getting issues solved were Jaffna (5%) followed by Matara (4%). There was no clarity in the nature of this discrimination in the questionnaires and further elaboration of these forms of discrimination should be probed in the end-line. The qualitative data highlighted further dimensions in the above responses and highlighted that discrimination against children could be by adults or by children themselves. Family The family was considered a domain of discrimination particularly by girls, and older children. Girls felt discriminated against in homes due to restrictions on mobility and felt it is boys who always had freedom. From Matara came the observation that boys received larger, more nutritious plates of food than girls. This, according to adults, is because “parents feel that boys should be better fed”. Children also felt they were treated unequally in large families where too many people and too few resources meant

42 See Chapter 8.


51

the “favourite” children received more attention, and particular discrimination was noticed against older children in Batticaloa. Older children often sacrificed their own education to enable younger children to attend school. Children whose parents/parent had migrated were often left under the care of aunts and uncles. Here, children noted differential treatment towards children of migrant parents when compared to the treatment given to the aunts’ and uncles’ own children. Community Communities were a critical source of discrimination according to both children and adults, be it in day-to-day community interactions, or in accessing common community resources. Recreational facilities were a commonly-mentioned domain of discrimination. Children in several districts felt that girls and children with disabilities were particularly marginalized in accessing recreational facilities. They were “pulled” into the home because of parental conservatism and “pushed” out of the playground which was dominated by boys and “able” persons. Other forms of discrimination mentioned were that children whose parents were abroad were looked at “differently”. Discrimination due to the colour of a child’s skin re-emerged here, reflecting the findings of quantitative data. Children observed in discussions that children with speech impairments were “accommodated” by others, but they were bullied and therefore automatically cornered themselves from mainstream activities with other children. This is an important observation that indicates that “tolerance” of children with disabilities does not mean full inclusion and equal treatment. Adults too were sensitive to the emotional hurt felt by children with disability due to this marginalization; “children with disability when excluded by others feel sorry and depressed. Therefore, other children should absorb these children to their groups”. Children too are here implicated in the marginalization of children with disability. The VCRMC in Anuradhapura also observed that the fact that children spoke an “uncommon dialect” resulted in the marginalization of children, which indicates discrimination within speakers of the same language. School The highest percentage reporting discrimination in schools were from Jaffna (21%) followed by Ampara, Matara and Batticaloa43. Poverty was the key reason for discrimination in accessing education facilities (through schools). Children in the respondent community were considered discriminated against in schools in the Colombo district with its relatively high disparity between rich and poor and where children of diverse social status attended the same school.

43 It is interesting here that quantitative data did not highlight the findings of qualitative data that the

respondents in Colombo who were from a low-income group in an otherwise resource-rich district noted

acute discrimination of children in schools they attended which were also attended by children from much

higher income groups/ or “higher” social status.


52

Some particularly idiosyncratic forms of discrimination also emerged such as the observation from older children in Jaffna that only “tall” children being allowed to take part in sport. State services If services of the state are not planned so as to ensure non-discrimination and inclusion, there is a high likelihood that State mechanisms and attitudes and practices of officials may intentionally or unintentionally discriminate against certain groups of children/communities. In Jaffna, children said they were marginalized due to race and religion. Jaffna, with an almost 100% Tamil-speaking community, has had years of military presence with certain public departments run predominantly by non-Tamil speaking officials. One elaboration of discrimination due to race and religion was the fact that children and communities had difficulties communicating with police due to police officers being predominantly Sinhala-speaking. This is specifically discriminatory in terms of police department practices which have overlooked the importance of language and communication in assigning personnel. Children in Jaffna once again reported the notably highest incidences of difficulty in obtaining birth certificates and children in Matara reported the highest rate of difficulty in accessing healthcare services.

6.4 Children’s Vs. Adults’ Perceptions on Discrimination

While there were some similarities in the facts highlighted by adults and children as forms of discrimination, children’s observations on discrimination were far more acute and nuanced, and sprang from their own recent and immediate experiences in society. Adults across districts did however notice discrimination due to caste (“laundry workers”, creed (“gypsy”), type of work parents engaged in, disability and parents’ marital status if they were married for the second time. Adults’ observations on discrimination were often judgmental such as the observation from members of Village Child Rights Monitoring Committees that children got discriminated against due to the “wrong-doings” of parents, or “wrong” sexual relations. Adults also observed that children themselves practice discrimination. What needs to be noted however is that children internalize what they observe around them in the form of adult values and practices, and children lacked positive role models of non-discrimination. Adults in VCRMCs demonstrated discriminatory attitudes in their own perceptions of children, and often in intense forms. In one VCRMC, members expressed anxiety over marginalized children’s groups associating their “own” children and said this was like “a drop of cow dung has fallen on a pot of milk” (kiri hattiyata goma binduwak vatuna vagey”). The disparity in responses among children and school authorities stood out the strongest and reflected the divide demonstrated in the participation chapter (Chapter 5). While children were intense about some of the forms of discrimination they faced within the school, teachers and principals generally tended to feel there was no discrimination within the institution of the school. Teachers and principals felt that if at all children were discriminated against in the school or in relation to education, it was because of low


53

attendance in schools, or low interest in education, none of which children mentioned as reasons for discrimination. Children, on the other hand, felt there were discriminatory reasons because of which they could not attend school, such as due to poverty and low social status.

6.5 Conclusion

The implications of the above findings for strategizing to end discrimination, and planning inclusive networking for children involve several dimensions. Critical to these is creating a solid understanding of Article 2 of the UNCRC and examining more closely concerns highlighted by children above. This has implications for addressing discriminatory practices in the home (most of which were based on gender or age), community (gender, disability and social status), school and state departments. Some discriminatory practices may have policy implications which needs to be further studied including through revisiting the Supplementary Report to the UNCRC and a thorough analysis of policies affecting children through the prism of non-discrimination. At an operational level in terms of the RCR TPP, it needs to be ensured that children participate in networks irrespective of poverty, caste, learning ability and all other categories mentioned above which children feel are ways in which they are discriminated against. Higher levels of marginality if reported in the end-line study need not be taken as a worsening of the situation of inclusion, as this could well be due to higher awareness levels on what non-discrimination constitutes in the process of empowerment. In this case, qualitative data becomes all the more important in understanding changing perceptions and practices in terms of non-discrimination. A critical question that can be posed in the end-line evaluation of the RCR TPP is whether the process of networking, which is now only emerging, has resulted in the reduction/ending of specific forms of discrimination.


54

Chapter 7 The Best Interest of the Child

7.1 Introduction

The best interest of the child is one of the fundamental principles of the UNCRC underpinning the interpretation of all children's rights and freedoms. The UNCRC suggest that the best interest of the child should be made at least a primary consideration, and sometimes paramount, in actions and decisions concerning children (UNCRC, Article 3.1). Best interest is most applicable in relation to child protection and custodianship (UNCRC, Article 9.1), continuing contact with one or both parents (UNCRC, Article 9.3), adoption (UNCRC, Article 21) and parental decision making (UNCRC, Article 18.1). The most appropriate form of care for the child and means of disciplining the child should be based on her or his best interest.

This chapter looks at specific aspects of children’s best interest in terms of children’s and adults’ perceptions of parental love and care, disciplining within the home and school, and counselling services within educational structures. Best interest of children in judicial decision-making is not part of this study.

7.2 Care

The primary caregiver of a child is his or her parents and the family and the child’s own community is held to be of paramount importance in providing the child with adequate care. However, social, economic and personal circumstances often deprive children of this parental care, love and protection. These groups of children include orphans (death of both parents), children who have lost contact with his/her caregivers (for example, street children, unaccompanied displaced or refugee children); children who have been separated from their parents (for example, where parents are detained or children are abducted); children who have been placed in alternative care by their caregivers (for example, children with disabilities or children from poor families who are placed in institutions); or children in prolonged hospital care (for example, on grounds of health status, such as HIV status); and those that have been detained in educational, remand, correctional or penal facilities as a result of an administrative or judicial decision (for example, suspected or convicted offenders or child asylum seekers) (Unicef:2010). However, children within regular family settings also face issues of inadequate care.

7.3 Children’s Perceptions about Care They Receive

It is noteworthy that more than 94.6% of children are satisfied about the way they are loved and cared for by their parents or guardian and children elaborated on the care and love they receive from parents, particularly mothers. According to the figure below, the highest percentage of children who do not believe that they are cared for are from Anuradhapura, followed by Ampara.


55

Figure 7.1 Children on satisfaction with forms of care by parents/guardian as

%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Like the way cared for

Do not like the way cared

for

However, children’s own statements on corporal punishment, decision-making within the home and school, parents’ use of alcohol, and other engagements within family and community indicate that forms of care for children could consider children’s best interest to a higher degree. These, however, were not elements children perceived as those affecting their “care”.

Figure 7.2 Reasons for dissatisfaction with forms of care as %

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

No, I am not sent toschool

No, Not attending to myhealth

No, I don't have attentionand love

No, I have to work

According to Figure 7.2 which demonstrates the responses of 473 children, the major reason children feel uncared for is because they are not sent to school. As a result of the remoteness of the area, access to schooling is limited in the area of study. The major reason given in Ampara is that children have to participate in economic activities without their consent.

The qualitative data revealed that children felt parents’ ability to care for them was reduced due to parents use of alcohol and due to fathers being compelled to work day and night to ensure families had income and food, which results in mothers being solely responsible the bringing up children. Children without parents and children living in poverty were considered to be more vulnerable to lack of care.

7.4 Disciplining

Parents, guardians and education personnel have a duty to guide children when they may be doing wrong. These means of guidance could either be positive, or harmful.


56

In some cases, disciplining could become violent and abusive. Violent discipline could create long-term negative impacts on the victim and could include psychological (by yelling, humiliating, beating, causing injuries) or physical (by beating, causing injuries) harm. This may result not only in physical injuries in children in extreme cases, but may result in long-term psychosocial effects and aggressive behaviour of children and also create resentment towards parents and other figures of authority including resulting in unhealthy adult-child relations.

The baseline analyzed children’s observations on the methods that were used to discipline them.

Disciplining in the home Positive disciplining measures such as discussing and correcting the mistake were adopted in the home in all districts. Hitting is significantly high in Anuradhapura, Matara and Colombo. Scolding as a form of punishment is prevalent in all districts but was reported in highest rates in Matara and Colombo.

Figure 7.3 Children on nature of punishment in the home

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

They would ignore themistake

They would tell me I amwrong and try to correctme

They would scold me

They would hit me

They would punish me insome other way

Figure 7.4 Children’s perspectives of the punishments received in the home

73.3

92.1

66.7

95.5 100

69.5

3.3

2.2 6.7

4.5

0

7.3

1.1

0

13.3

0 0 0

22.2

5.6 13.3

0 0

20.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Punishment is proportionate

to the wrong

Punished regardless of theextent of wrong

Punished for no apparentreason

Get beaten up by parentsguardian if they are in badmood


57

79.5% of children feel the punishment they receive is proportionate to the wrong they have committed. It is significant that 13% of children in Jaffna feel they get punished for no apparent reason. This is attributed to the communication gap between parents and children as highlighted during group discussions with children. Over 20% of children from Anuradhapura and Colombo believe that they are beaten by parents and guardians just because parents are in a “bad mood”. Physically punishing children for no apparent reason has resulted in children loosing confidence and trust in parents, even when it comes to reporting abuse caused by outsiders. Awareness and corporal punishment There is a clear link between locations where child rights awareness programmes were held and the higher prevalence of positive disciplining methods. This is portrayed in Figure 7.6 below.

Figure 7.5 Correlation between awareness programmes and corporal punishment in the home.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Anuradhapura Matara Jaffna Batticaloa Ampara Colombo

Awareness programmes They would hit me

This indicates the importance of proactive interventions with communities that create discussion and awareness among adults and children on the consequences of corporal punishment and practical means of guiding children in non-violent ways. Disciplining at School Physical and verbal abuse is used as common forms of punishment in schools in all districts and levels of corporal punishment were much higher in schools than in the homes. The use of positive disciplinary methods is rare except in Batticaloa and Matara where a relatively higher proportion of children indicated that parents corrected their mistakes through advice. Punishment within schools ranged from hard physical punishment to punishment that ranged from standing until the end of the class, forcefully getting children to recite to the class, forcing children to do classroom and school chores, temporary termination of classes, and isolation from other children. Some teachers, however, were clearly against forms of physical punishment. Some forms of positive disciplining such as “advising” was also reported by children.


58

Figure 7.6 Types of disciplining methods used by teachers in the school

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

They would tell me I am wrongand try to correct me

They would scold me

They would hit me

They would punish me in someother way Explain

Only 16.3% of children in Jaffna and 26.5% of Batticaloa feel the punishment they receive from teachers is proportionate to the wrong. Meanwhile, 25% of children from Colombo and 11% of children from Anuradhapura believe that they are more likely to be beaten up by teachers when the teachers are in a bad mood. Painful forms of punishment were reported by children in some districts including methods such as putting sand on the floor and asking children to kneel down on the sand. These are trends to be concerned about considering the long-term impact these forms of treatment may have on children, as well as considering the blanket ban on corporal punishment required in the circular to all schools. See more on corporal punishment and its relationship to participation in Chapter 5 (Children’s Participation in Governance) Comparative analysis of home vs. school disciplining Children see parents to be more likely to explain their wrongdoing or to scold whereas children are more likely to be scolded or beaten up by their teachers.

Figure 7.7 Comparison of teachers and parents use of corporal punishment

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Anuradhapura Matara Jaffna Batticaloa Ampara Colombo

Teachers They would hit me Parents They would hit me

As reflected in Figure 7.7, it is evident that children in all districts are more likely to get beaten by teachers in comparison to the chances of children being beaten at home. This tendency is highest in Batticaloa followed by in Ampara.


59

Children are also more likely to get scolded by teachers than by their parents and guardians. In Jaffna and Batticaloa, around 65% of children said that they are asked to kneel down or stand up on chair by teachers as punishments. These forms of punishments are rarely practiced by parents. 7.4 Counseling Services in Schools Children’s ability to speak about personal or education issues they may be having with adults in the school system is an important mechanism that can alleviate children’s psychological stress and enable them to participate fully in education. These mechanisms should be in place with the child’s best interest in mind. While in theory, each school is meant to have a counselor, in practice, either these counselors were co-opted for other work during times specified for counseling due to shortage of teachers, they were not competent and hadn’t received proper training, or the different concerns of boys and girls have not been considered in appointing counselors. For example, many schools reported the difficulty that boys, for example, had in approaching female counselors who took on role of counselor in a large number of schools. Some schools however, had addressed this particular difficulty and assigned both a female and male counselor who works part time on this role. 7.5 Protection, Institutionalization and the Legal System The following survival and development chapter highlights the quality for care in terms of reporting and addressing forms of abuse. Issues of lack of sensitivity, lack of confidentiality and lack of capacity and personnel in the process of reporting and gaining redress for cases of abuse have come out consistently from almost all districts. While no specific attention was paid to institutionalization, other forms of custodial care and the role of the legal system in addressing children’s best interest in decisions about custodial care, these may be referred to through other forms of documentation at Save the Children. 7.6 Conclusion While most children affirm that they are satisfied with the forms of care they receive in their homes and admit to being loved by their parents, other data indicate that children are still concerned about issues such as corporal punishment and parents’ alcoholism. Children whose circumstances require them to interact with the police also express discomfort at facing these mechanisms. They are also concerned about corporal punishment in schools and feel that punishment is not proportionate to the wrong. Disciplining children often takes on abusive forms, particularly in schools, but also to a lesser extent in the homes. It is evident that positive disciplinary measures are not properly adopted in schools and in the home. As mentioned above, custodial care with all its legal implications are not looked at fully in this chapter, but the study does point to the wealth of resources within Save the Children that can indicate the current status of custodial care and the role of the judiciary in appointing custodial care. The findings highlighted in this chapter requires greater attention to be paid to issues of children’s best interest with different stakeholders, including creating a full understanding on the implications of he Best Interest article in the UNCRC. Particular attention has to be paid to issues such as corporal punishment, particularly in schools, but also in the home. Teachers should be provided with tools for alternative


60

forms of positive disciplining that is in the best interest of the child. Children’s voices need to be heard on these forms of punishment, and the impact these forms of punishment may have on their physical and psychological wellbeing, on their education and their capacity to develop as human beings. Greater attention has to be paid to prioritizing the role of counselors in schools and to allocating meaningful time to them. The different needs of girls and boys need also to be considered in appointing counselors. Protection mechanisms, as highlighted in the following chapter, need to be strengthened to ensure professionalism, sufficient personnel and confidentiality and timeliness of processes and redressal.


61

Chapter 8 Survival and Development

8.1 Introduction Article 6 of the UNCRC on Survival and Development recognizes the responsibility of States parties to protect each child’s inherent right to life and to ensure the survival and development of the child in the fullest possible way. Among the multiple rights that lead to the adequate survival and development of the child, this chapter will focus on children’s right to healthcare, nutrition, and education, and protection from abuse. Processes of children’s participation, ensuring non-discrimination and a child’s best interest will, it is assumed, ultimately lead to equitable service provision and the optimum survival and development of the child. The impact indicator of the RCR TPP i.e. % of children surveyed in project areas who report improved fulfilment of rights e.g. access to and quality of health, education and protection services will be the indicator that will measure the final impact of all the processes the RCR TPP undertakes. This chapter then, will analyze current status in access to services that ensure survival and development as reported by child and adult respondents which will enable later measurements of progress against the impact indicator. Attribution of gains in survival and development as those resulting from interventions related to the RCR TPP has, however, to be backed by solid evidence. 8.2 Health All children have the right to "the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health" and should have access to facilities for treatment and rehabilitation. (UNCRC, Article 24). The relationship between education and access to information in fulfilling the right to health is also recognized in Article 17 and 24.2 (e) (f) of UNCRC. The State is invested with the primary responsibility of providing health care both in the UNCRC, and in the Constitution of Sri Lanka. With this assumption in mind, the baseline inquired into types of health care facilities and medication used by children, and access to such health care facilities. 8.2.1 Health Care Facilities The figure below indicates types of health care facilities used by children as indicated in survey findings. Children provided multiple answers to this question.


62

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticalo

Ampara

Colombo

Total

Home remedy

Government clinic/areahospital

Private clinic/doctor

Indigenous doctor

Other

Figure 8.1 Types of healthcare facilities used by children (%)

The type of health care facility used the most by children in all districts in the sample is free medical services provided by the Government through Government clinics and hospitals. Children in Anuradhapura and Matara reported notably lower use of free Government health care facilities. This is due to the difficulties in accessing government facilities in remote locations where the sample was derived from. As a VCRMC member in Anuradhapura says, “Free medical facilities are available, but for us we don’t enjoy these rights. We have to travel at least eight kilometres to go to the health centre. If it is a serious illness we have to go to the Anuradhapura town. There is no proper transport system for us to go to the medical centre. No NGO is providing support. A few people have even died because they were not able to get medical care. The Pradeshiya health centre is available, but it is far away and doesn’t have facilities.” Private clinics are a source of consultation and medication for those who have difficulty accessing state health services, or those who find it inconvenient to do so. It is also a source of medication in circumstances where certain forms of medication are not available through state health care services. Private clinics are seen as an option mostly by Matara and Anuradhapura. Use of indigenous/ayurvedic treatment by children in all districts is extremely low. The Jaffna district showed a marked difference in terms of use of home remedies with over 80% of children claiming to use home remedies. While this is not a negative trend in itself, the reliance on home remedies might also be a result of the absence of adequate health care facilities in the region observed by VCRMC members. The use of home remedies is also seen in Colombo and Anuradhapura. Even through there are no significant differences of children using the government sector for their medical services and using home remedies according to levels of household income, there is a clear pattern in the use of the private sector for medical services; survey data indicates that it is a common practice for people to obtain medical consultation through the government system and to obtain drugs from the pharmacies. The chances of people using drugs from pharmacies increase with the available income.


63

The distance to public medical care facilities, according to both children and adults, deprived children of the right to free health care. In Batticaloa, the VCPC mentioned the need to go to the neighbouring village to access government services, and in Anuradhapura, VCRMC members mentioned the lack of transport facilities to access such centres. While in theory, there is a strong network of Public Health Inspectors (PHIs) regularly visiting communities for monitoring the health status of under-fives, in practice, remote areas barely received the optimum benefits of these public services. PHI services are often reactive and visits only occur if cases of serious infections are reported. From Ampara and Matara came the observation that PHIs rarely visited homes, and the VCRMC in Matara claimed that PHIs demanded three-wheelers to visit homes, and failed to show up if transport was not provided. As a result, no proper growth charts were maintained for children under five, and triposha distribution to mothers and young children did not occur. These trends could have long-term impacts on children’s growth and could exacerbate malnutrition. 8.2.2 Medical Treatment Obtaining medication free from government hospitals was highest in Jaffna followed by Batticaloa, Colombo and Ampara districts. However, obtaining free medicine is less in Anuradhapura and Matara districts which show greater use of private sector facilities and private pharmacies to obtain medication. According to members of the Matara VCRMC, the reason to depend on private medicine is because of the unavailability of medicines or immunization in rural hospitals. Using private sector facilities and private pharmacies is least in Ampara and Batticaloa. In Colombo, while people have access to free health services and resources, people also rely on the private sector which is relatively more diversified considering that Colombo is relatively more resource-rich by virtue of being the capital city. Non-availability of drugs for certain illnesses was seen by children from Colombo than in many other districts, which is surprising, considering that the sample areas were in close proximity to the National Hospital of Sri Lanka and other well-equipped health facilities run by the government. Even child deaths were reported by communities in Colombo due to the negligence and poor functioning of public health systems available to marginalized groups.

Figure 8.2 Type of medication used by children

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticalo

Ampara

Colombo

Total

Free, from the governmentclinic/hospital

Some medicines are free,but some medications arenot given

Buy it at a pharmacy

Use local herbs

Other.


64

The most popular source of obtaining medication (as opposed to medical consultation) has been the government sector which provides free of charge medical services. However, in the Districts of Matara and Colombo, as well in other districts in lower proportions, respondents have indicated issues pertaining to access to free medication. Children in Anuradhapura and Matara reported a higher use of the private sector to obtain medical services which may be due to the convenience factor. Government hospitals also seem to provide services during limited hours, another reason why children reported to be accessing private medical care as seen in Anuradhapura and Matara. Children have also mentioned that the hospitals are overcrowded, leading to long hours of waiting to obtain medication. In Jaffna, Ampara and Batticaloa, the majority of the children mentioned a shortage of drugs at the government hospitals. However, they have not seen the private sector as an option perhaps due to the lack of such options in these directly war-affected locations which has meant a further deterioration of health services. A mother in Matara mentioned wastage of time in public health care centres and the indifference of hospital staff: As a mother stated: “Once at the clinic the children were immunized and we were asked to wait for children to be weighed. We waited for one and a half hours and at 12 noon the midwife said it’s getting late, I don’t have time, and went”. There were also observations of lack of immunization. 8.3 Nutrition

Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child that deals with the right to health care and states that States Parties shall take appropriate measures to combat disease and malnutrition through the provision of adequate nutritious foods, clean drinking water, and health care. Malnutrition may result from improper diet, ill health and inadequate or improper care (Kent, A: 1994). There are different types of malnutrition, including protein-energy malnutrition and specific micronutrient deficiencies (i.e., inadequate vitamin A, iodine, iron, etc.).

In the baseline, nutrition levels of children are analyzed based on consumption of food. The study also analyses the access to free meals in school and the content of school meals in order to assess the nutritional value of meal programmes. 8.3.1 Food Consumption

Figure 8.3 Types of food consumed by children within the past week

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Total

Rice

Wheat flour productions

Potatoes

Manioc

Other grain

Fish

Meat

Eggs

Soya

Dhal

Coconut

Vegetable

Leaves

Milk

Other


65

The variety of food consumed in Jaffna is significantly limited to rice and wheat flour products. This could be due to limited access to food due to long-term embargoes during the war and continuing long-term repercussions of these restrictions. Fishing is a major means of income in Jaffna but is not reported to be consumed by respondents. Vegetable intake in Colombo is extremely low. This could be a result of urbanization and unavailability of space to grow vegetables at home. 8.3.2 School Feeding Programmes Children attending schools in the Districts of Jaffna (96%), Batticloa (97.4%) and Ampara (34.8%) are more likely to receive a meal at school in comparison to children attending schools in Anuradhapura (5.1%), Colombo (6.7%) and Matara (26.1%). This could be due to the North and East receiving greater attention in development programmes through NGO and government interventions due to the military conflict. While this focus is necessary, data also highlights the importance of closer scrutiny of children’s nutritional needs in the rest of the country.

Figure 8.4 Provision of school meals %

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

No

Yes

Most meals contain rice, the staple food in all parts of Sri Lanka. However, types of food as demonstrated in Figure 8.5 indicate the low nutritional values contained in school meals.

Figure 8.5 Composition of food in the school meal by district

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Rice

Wheat flour productions

Potatoes

Other grain

Fish

Dhal

Oil

Vegetable


66

Apart from rice, other food grains have been provided in almost all the districts apart from Jaffna and Colombo. Wheat products have also been provided in schools. School nutrition programmes have many quality issues where most of the meals are unbalanced in nutritional contents; less emphasis is given to inclusion of food high in protein, minerals, vitamins and fiber which are essential for the development of children. More focus is given on filling the bellies of hungry children irrespective of nutrition. Considering the diversity of vegetables that can be grown in home gardens of Sri Lanka’s fertile soil, the addition of vegetables and green leaves in mid-day school meals could be increased several-fold. Protein intake need not be solely through high-cost animal protein, but could easily be balanced with sufficient amounts of food items such as soya. Related to access to reasonable nutrition and healthcare is the availability of clean, potable water. The lack of clean drinking water came out as a critical issue in most of the districts. Children in Anuradhapura pointed out how they drank brackish water in the absence of good water. Long-term effects were also observed in adults who suffered from kidney disease due to the consumption of bad water. According to a VCRMC member in Anuradhapura, children have no access to regular meals during drought, as there is no harvesting during drought. Based on qualitative data, it may be also necessary to look specifically at the nutrition of girls considering that there are some reports of boys being favoured in the distribution of limited nutritional food in the home. 8.4 Child Protection Save the Children defines child protection as “measures and structures to prevent and respond to abuse, neglect, exploitation and violence affecting children” (Save the Children Sweden). Multi-disciplinary and multi-sectoral child protection mechanisms implemented and/or coordinated by Government and civil society is currently functioning in Sri Lanka as outlined in Chapter 2 (Context). The baseline looks at children’s knowledge and awareness on available child protection mechanisms and their access and use of such mechanisms. 8.4.1 Children’s Awareness of Child Protection Mechanisms Awareness of existing child protection mechanisms and access to such mechanisms could greatly increase children’s ability to report and reduce the vulnerability of children to abuse. Figure 8.6 below demonstrates how around 30% of children indicate that they are not aware of mechanisms for reporting child abuse. From the 70% of children who claim to have a sufficient knowledge of child abuse mechanisms, knowledge about child protection mechanisms is given in the figure below.


67

Figure 8.6 Children’s knowledge of mechanisms for reporting child abuse

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Mother/ father/ guardian

Teacher

VCPC/VCRMC member /committee

Police

CRPO/PO

National Child ProtectionAuthority

Human RightsCommission

Other

Don't know

According to Figure 8.6, the greatest awareness was around the police as a mechanism to report child abuse to. This was followed by mother/ father/ guardian (29%). Other mechanisms identified include teachers (14.2%) and village level child protection mechanisms (5.9%). The low functioning of the role of village level mechanisms in addressing local child protection issues is clear. District and national NCPA offices are seen as a mechanism to report child protection issues only by 5% of children and CRPO/ PO is seen as personnel to report abuses only by a mere 1.9% of children. In Jaffna and Colombo, a small proportion of children mentioned the Human Rights Commission as a mechanism to which abuse was reported. While the police was seen predominantly by children as the place to report abuse, it is noteworthy that elsewhere, children and adults mentioned a lack of confidence in the police, and the Jaffna DCDC mentioned a language problem at police stations where the majority of policemen spoke Sinhala in an area where a large proportion of the population were Tamil-speaking. In the Venn diagram exercise, the police was considered important, but inefficient and fearful by children. They observed that they had to go to the police station several times for the same complaint. Knowledge on child abuse reporting mechanisms was higher among children going to school (70.7%) in contrast to the knowledge of children who are not attending school (63.3%). Obstacles in accessing child protection services were identified as lack of awareness and costs involved. Going to the police and Courts to report cases of abuse cost money and time according to VCRMC members in Jaffna. Parents were also not aware of what constitute abuse as mentioned by VCRMC members in Matara, and people had no awareness of formal mechanisms as mentioned by VCRMC members in Matara and Anuradhapura. Further obstacles mentioned by communities were the lack of confidentiality of reporting mechanisms and cultural factors that inhibited reporting abuse. As VCRMC members in Anuradhapura commented, “we just cannot report abuse to the formal system as everyone in the community is related to each other. No one wants to use the legal system. We always try to hide things if something happens. It is not good for the reputation of the family if something gets out”. Incidences were also reported of


68

sexual abuse of boys and the further victimization of the victims by communities themselves, and also of silences around these forms of abuse. There were, however, incidents where abuse cases are often resolved at village level without resort to police action. 8.4.2 Awareness of Child Protection There were clear indications that grade in school and awareness programmes increased the likelihood of children being aware of, and using, protection mechanisms. Level of education and awareness on child protection mechanisms The figures given below portray a positive correlation between grade in school and awareness of reporting mechanisms.

Figure 8.7 Grade of school versus knowledge on whom to report abuse

Grade in school

% knowledge

4 41

5 56.5

6 68.3

7 63.6

8 75.9

9 78.9

10 85.7

11 80

12 100

13 100

Relationship between the existence of awareness programmes on child rights and accessing child protection mechanisms The common pattern in Figures 8.8 and 8.9 below indicate that the likelihood of children accessing reporting mechanisms could be increased through awareness creation on protection mechanisms and child rights.

Figure 8.8 Percent of children by district accessing services to report

abuse.

Figure 8.9 Percent reporting existence of awareness programmes

11.1 16.730

61

24.712.5

88.9 83.370

39

75.387.5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

18.7

55.174 67.7 60.9

17.8

81.3

44.926 32.3 39.1

82.2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo


69

Types of organization conducting awareness raising programmes While most of the awareness raising programmes on child rights and protection mechanisms were conducted by the NGOs and CBOs, the next contributor for child protection awareness has been through school programmes. However, school programmes themselves which are conducted by NGOs and CBOs are not differentiated in the chart below, which may indicate a greater contribution to awareness programmes from NGOs and CBOs considering ground realities. In Colombo and Anuradhapura, there has been a larger proportion of awareness raising progrmmes conducted by the government sector in comparison to other areas. Figure 8.10 Awareness raising programmes conducted by type of organisation

27.1

3.7

4.554.6

2.6 7.4

School programs

Community leaders'programs

Government programs

NGO/CBO programs

Child Rights MonitoringCommittee programs

Children's programs

While NGO support in community awareness creation is commendable, it is of concern here that the parallel mechanisms of the non-governmental sector is seen to be taking on a large proportion of responsibility in awareness creation. State mechanisms should mainstream awareness creation on their own accord and should be recognized within communities as a sector that enables them in the provision of information and knowledge. CRAN and the children’s networks should also lobby the State sector in taking on greater responsibility for awareness creation and information-sharing considering the non-permanent and geographically limited nature of NGO activity. It is also noteworthy here, considering this data and considering the biases of the baseline, that these particularly locations were ones with considerable NGO activity. Locations without a similar NGO presence may have less access to awareness programmes even though this report cannot demonstrate evidence for this. A critical gain of the RCR TPP would be that measurements against these factors would show increased government action in creating awareness and disseminating information on child abuse and child protection, enabled through the CRAN and Children’s Child Rights Network holding State duty bearers responsible for these as stipulated in State policies and circulars.


70

Figure 8.11 Awareness programmes conducted by type of organization by district %

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Children's programs

Child Rights MonitoringCommittee programs

NGO/CBO programs

Government programs

Community leaders'programs

School programs

8.5 Education

The right to education is a right in itself, and is also an enabling right. Education “creates the voice through which rights can be claimed and protected” according to the Right to Education Project (2008). In the baseline, the fulfilment of the right to education was measured through access and participation in school, and reasons for non-participation. 8.5.1 School attendance It is clear from Figure 8.12 that the statistics from marginalized communities in terms of schooling status raises issues about how national level indicators hide geographical disparities in educational attainment. That 13.4% of children in the sample were non-school going is a critical finding considering the guarantee of free education enshrined in the Constitution, and national statistics that claim high education attainment levels and high literacy rates.

Figure 8.12 Children’s schooling status by district %

85% 90%

64%

77% 87%

84%

4%

0%

15%

10%

1% 2%6%

2% 10%

0% 2% 8%

5% 8% 11%

13%

10%

6%

0%10%20%

30%40%50%60%

70%80%90%100%

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Schooling regularly

Not schooling regularly

Not schooling

School drop outs

Only 81% of the entire sample of 600 children claimed to be schooling regularly, and 5.3% claimed to be schooling irregularly (less than four days a week). As much as 13.4% of the children claimed not to be schooling at all, with 8.8% of this 13.4% being officially declared “drop-outs” and hence permanently out of the mainstream schooling system.


71

The lowest regular school attendance rates are shown in Jaffna (64%) followed by Batticaloa (77%) and Colombo (84%). The highest number of permanent school drop outs were from Batticaloa (13%), followed by Jaffna (11%). Here once again, directly war-affected regions demonstrate a higher impact on the negative schooling status of children. 8.5.2 Reasons for Non-Attendance or Irregular School Attendance The main reasons for not attending school or dropping out from school is seen by children as financial difficulties/poverty (35%), having no school (24%), absence of good access roads to schools (12%), and physical illnesses (7%). Other significant areas identified were children being discouraged by teachers, distance to school, mental illnesses of children, caring for family members, security reasons, children being employed part time, children being rejected (prevented) from entering schools, and children caring for sick parents. There was a tendency to drop out from school from grade four. The highest dropout rates are reported from grade 5 and grade 11.

Figure 8.13 Reasons for non-schooling by district %

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

Total

Rejected from entering

schoolDislike school

No school

Terrain leading to

schoolDistance to school

Discouraged byteachersDiscouraged byparentsSecurity reasons

Employed part time

Caring for familymembersCaring for sick parents

Mental illness

Physical Illness

Financial difficulties

In Matara, having no school has been a major factor contributing to not attending school. In Jaffna, the main factors leading for dropping out of school have been financial difficulties and the terrain leading to school. In Colombo, children representing the urban poor see financial difficulties as the predominant factor leading to dropping out of school. Children also gave prominence to economic activity which they preferred over school. In Matara, principals and teachers commented on how children say “they could not get up on time” when asked why they come late to school, as they were engaged in income-earning activities to do with local festivities such as religious processions during certain seasons, and so on. According to children from Anuradhapura and Battcaloa, a majority of children were engaged in farming, chena or paddy cultivation. As this is hard physical labour and is tiring, they invariably skip school and eventually drop out. From Batticaloa came the observation that it is male children who drop out of school the most, data that is consistent with many previous research findings of education in Sri Lanka. Children not living with their parents are another category seen as


72

vulnerable to dropping out of schools. The lack of birth certificates was mentioned as a key factor affecting the sitting of examinations by marginalized communities, as highlighted in Anuradhapura. There were strong statements by children and communities about the ideal versus actual practice of “free education”. About 41% of the 600 parents and guardians interviewed during the survey indicated that they spent between Rs 1000 – 2500 on education each month, and 13% indicated they spent between 2500 – 5000 a month on things ranging from transport, project work, facilities fees and school stationery. For a sample in which 46% of households claim to earn between Rs 5000 – Rs 9999, and 12% claim to have a monthly income of Rs 2958-4999 (58% below Rs 9999) this could be a considerable, and often unbearable cost for education. While the provisions of the free education system such as the provision of free uniform material and free textbooks were appreciated by all, education was only considered free in a nominal sense. According to VCRMC members in Matara, “There is a cost for everything in education. Children are humiliated for the inability to meat the costs”. Often costs of shoes, exercise books, and expenditure for project work are unbearable for parents. Moreover, while free school uniform material was provided, some children in most marginalized regions were not able to afford tailoring charges. There were also reports from Matara of random charges being fixed as facilities fees where some schools charged Rs. 15 for three months, and others charged Rs 300, while others charged no facilities fees at all. VCPCs in the districts of Ampara, Batticaloa, Jaffna, Anuradhapura and Colombo also mentioned the high cost of tuition, now an inevitable part of the education culture in Sri Lanka which reflects the competitiveness of the system, but also the relative poor quality of teaching in schools. However, other respondents also noted that marginalized children’s groups lacked access to both quality school education and tuition facilities. The regimented examination systems made children feel constrained within the education system. Even teachers noticed this. As one principal in the FGD in Matara observed, “The current education system does not provide children any free time and they have no time to rest. And so, leisure and children’s creativity have no place. Syllabuses and curriculum are enormous, making things difficult for children as well as teachers. Although teacher training methods practiced in Sri Lanka are accepted by the world, the reality is not like that”. 8.5.3 Avenues for Skills Development A total of 55 children responded to the question below on avenues of skills development for non-school-going children.


73

Figure 8.14 Avenues for developing skills for school drop-outs %

25%

50%

15.40%

12.50% 25%

50% 37.50%

50%

84.60%

87.50% 75%

50%

12.50%

12.50%

12.50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Anuradhapura

Matara

Jaffna

Batticaloa

Ampara

Colombo

No avenues for skilldevelopment

Tuition

Private institution

Vocational training

Other

It is clear that most do not see sufficient avenues of skills development open to them as they drop out of school. The lowest skill development options are reported from Batticaloa and Ampara, followed by Colombo. Availability of alternative livelihood skills development training is highest in Matara with relatively diversified sectors including tuition, private institutions and other forms of vocational training. In Jaffna, 45% of children see that there are avenues for skills development if they drop out from school prematurely. Surprisingly, Colombo’s statistics show that the knowledge on available avenues for vocational training is much less in comparison to most other districts. This is due to lower priority to developing such skills and lack of awareness of children on avenues available. 8.6 Conclusion The Sri Lankan State clearly provides systems and mechanisms which children are able to access in terms of health, education and child protection. Yet, there are critical gaps in the equal distribution of resources, and access to such resources by particular marginalized groups of children as those spoken to during the baseline. It is apparent that access to free heath services, free education, free protection mechanisms of children belonging to poorest families and those who are living in remote interior areas are affected by inadequate resources, access difficulties created by terrain and timing, and lack of awareness. Also, where access is inconvenient or remote, families with reasonable income resorted to paid services which were more accessible and available at the wanted time.

Right to nutrition of children is not properly fulfilled as most of the children are not consuming balanced meals. School meal programmes also seem to be giving little attention to the nutrition value of the meal. Nutritional food intake could be enhanced by various approaches including increasing food production, nutrition education and feeding programmes.

In child protection, many parents and teachers lack awareness of mechanisms that address child protection, or are unable to access these mechanisms. Awareness-raising programmes on child rights and child protection have taken place in the


74

coastal areas, probably due to post-tsunami investments. In contrast, baseline areas such as those in Colombo and Anuradhapura seem to be relatively backward and need urgent improvements in access to information and knowledge. Openness about child abuse is also restricted due to cultural factors and fear of lack of confidentiality of protection mechanisms. The predominant role that NGOs play in sample locations in creating awareness also sends out worrying signals as to the weak role the State sector plays in imparting knowledge and information and should be considered a critical area of lobbying by CRAN and children’s networks. Trends indicate increased deprivation in war-affected areas, but also highlight the need for closer attention to critical child rights concerns in marginalized communities in the whole of the country. The gaps identified above highlights the key role of enabling all children’s voices to be heard on these issues through CRAN and child-led organizations. There are clear policy implications in ensuring free public services to all, and in paying particular attention to issues raised by marginalized communities with regard to access, sensitivity, confidentiality, costs and other factors.

75

Chapter 9 Conclusions and Recommendations

9.1 Conclusions The Child Rights Baseline highlights issues of children’s participation, non-discrimination, best interest and access to services that ensure children’s survival and development. The critical focus of the study was the current status of children’s ability to participate in governance as stated by Objective 3 of the RCR TPP. Baseline findings indicate low levels of children’s participation in interfacing with duty bearers, and low levels of know-how in making this a reality. The baseline data also clearly indicates that regimented cultures, particularly in domains such as schools, restricts participation both in terms of attitudes and practices, and that high levels of corporal punishment was also linked to decreased participation. Children barely saw a link between themselves and national level decision-making which was considered too far away, and children were not aware of processes that took place at national level purportedly in their interest. As those without a vote, the agendas of politicians and parliament are clearly not within the radar of children. However, children should be informed of national political agendas, and the implications of national policy on their own wellbeing. Children should also be able to comment on and influence these national political agendas. Children do not participate in governance in a vacuum. The success of children’s participation in governance structures managed by adults will depend on adult receptivity to children’s ideas and concerns. Even though many policies and circulars stipulate children’s participation such as in DCDCs and VCRMCs, without a strongly internalized culture of participation, and without the capacity and commitment to enable participation, the realization of children’s participation in governance will be difficult to achieve. It is the challenge of the RCR TPP’s interventions to mobilize communities on the one hand, and strengthen duty bearers on the other, in enabling such participation. Thorough capacity-building of adults on rights-based child participation in governance, as well as examining state and non-state mechanisms for how they enable or disable children’s participation, are integral to empowering children. It is also vital to develop strategies together with adult stakeholders to enable greater children’s participation in planning, implementing and monitoring and evaluation of state and other duty bearer services. This could be in terms of changes in policies that allow for children’s participation as seen in the DCDC and VCRMC circulars, and creating enabling physcial spaces and mechanisms within state offices to enable children’s participation. Children report discriminatory practices and disregard of children’s best interest that detract from children’s full participation in issues that affect their lives, and children’s full survival and development. Discriminatory practices were observed in terms of children’s gender, disability, “ethnicity”, religion, social and economic status and various other factors that require further attention. These discriminatory practices are often those are culturally ingrained and considered “normal” and interventions need to take on the challenge of addressing these deep-rooted attitudes and practices.

76

The definition of a child’s best interest was often co-opted by adults to their own advantage. Beating children was seen as a necessary evil by some groups of adults, while children highlighted the disproportionate nature of punishment as against wrong-doing, and the willful use of violence by adults against children, both in the home and school depending on adult “moods”. Corporal punishment was banned through education circulars, but the practice was culturally sanctioned and a large proportion of children reported being beaten at schools, and a lesser proportion in homes. Punishment was often intense and physically injurious, both in the schools and homes. In survival and development, while policies proclaim free education, free health services and a well-networked childcare system, the real circumstances of most marginalized children demonstrate lack of access to services due to remoteness, excessive time consumed in accessing these services, and the inadequacy of these services. Even the much-praised community health services are in some districts deteriorating with less MoH visits impacting children’s nutrition and growth. Parents could often not afford the extra expenditure required of them through the mainstream education system as well as the now obligatory tuition classes. Protection services had too few personnel, and cultural barriers detracted from community use of these protection services where they did exist. The chapter on Survival and Development then, critically highlights how satisfactory national social indicators often hide the reality of the most marginalized communities. Making the RCR TPP interventions a success requires a social transformation that recognizes children’s role as citizens and decision-makers. Engagement would be necessary with children who should be facilitated to organize themselves and represent other children on all the issues highlighted by them in this baseline. The organization and right to assembly of children from most marginalized groups such as those marginalized through “ethnicity”, social status and class, religion, disability or in any other form should be particularly focused on. Modules prepared by Dhruva for Save the Children in the extensive Maintreaming Rights-Based Child Participation in Governance capacity building programmes should be mainstreamed in programme practices of all sectors to enable children’s participation, and also to ensure cross-sectoral adoption of strategies for children’s participation. Child rights practitioners should also develop a keen and nuanced understanding of sub-national, national and international policies and conventions in order to work with children and communities to make use of existing provisions, and also in order to advocate around gaps in such policies themselves, and around the implementation of such policies. All this would apply to core group members and CRAN members as well to ensure cross-organizational cohesion and broader and fuller impact. 9.2 Recommendations for Data Use and Follow-Up Use of Baseline Data

1. The Learning and Impact Unit and the RCR Sector at Save the Children should disseminate among, and discuss baseline data with, core group, CRAN members, children’s networks and with government stakeholders.

2. A child-friendly summary should be formulated for sharing with children and another summary for sharing with adults, with key stakeholder responsibilities in realizing child rights clearly defined.

77

3. The baseline findings should be a key source of information by the Children’s Child Rights Network and CRAN.

4. Baseline data should inform the Country Strategy Planning processes at Save the Children, as well as that of other organizations committed to fulfilling the goals of the RCR TPP.

5. District-specific quantitative and qualitative raw data should be made available to relevant district agencies of Save the Children, the Core Group, the Civil Society Network, and the Children’s Child Rights Networks for use in planning interventions. In this way, close attention should be paid to trends observed for particularly marginalized groups such as working/non-school going children, children directly affected by war and so on, aspects which may not be fully highlighted in this study.

The End-Line Evaluation

6. Baseline tools should be used as far a possible (adjusted where necessary) to

conduct the end-line evaluation preferably in the same locations as where the baseline was conducted. Where this is not possible, study locations should be similar in socio-economic and cultural context to baseline locations and should represent its demographic diversity (see annexe 3 for details of baseline sample locations).

7. The end-line should be based on a comparative analysis of baseline data and the data of the end-line.

8. The end-line should be conducted as participatory, collaborative learning experiences among Save the Children staff, core group members, CRAN, and children.

9. The end-line should consider the gathering of information for which no quantitative data is available in the baseline, i.e. on the nature and extent of children’s participation in the media, children’s participation in child-led children’s groups and so on for which frameworks for inquiry have been identified in this baseline, even though information is not available. The baseline itself provides qualitative data on some of these dimensions.

10. Children’s participation should be ensured in reviewing tools and methods of the end-line.

Children as Evaluators

11. Children should be encouraged to monitor their own progress within Children’s

Child Rights Networks in terms of baseline tools adjusted and simplified for easy use by children.

Data Analysis

12. It is important to be judicious in interpreting quantitative data. It is suggested that changes in quantitative data between the baseline and end-line be not taken literally. For example, higher rates of reports on non-discrimination may reflect a higher awareness of factors of non-discrimination rather than an increase in discriminatory practices themselves. In such circumstances, quantitative data should be considered together with qualitative data to provide a fair assessment of progress against baseline values.

78

Attribution

13. Attribution, specifically of quantitative and qualitative values against the impact indicator should be done with caution. For example, higher gains in access to education, health and protection services reported by children in the end-line study may not necessarily reflect gains made through the interventions of the RCR TPP. It could well be due to a policy change of the State with no links to network advocacy, or some other factor. Therefore, where impact changes are attributed to the RCR TPP process, this should be backed by solid evidence.

14. It may be easier to attribute changes in the process indicators i.e. that of progress in the processes of establishing children’s and adults’ child rights networks, due to the relative absence of such mainstream interventions. However, once again, caution should be exercised in attribution, and other such interventions to mobilize and empower children occurring outside of the RCR TPP process should also be taken into consideration.

79

References CENWOR. 2008. Women Migrant Workers of Sri Lanka. Center for Women’s Research http://www.cenwor.lk/migworkersstat.html Child Rights Information Network. 2010. Convention on the Rights of the Child. http://www.crin.org/docs/resources/treaties/uncrc.asp. CIA. 2009. World fact book- Sri Lanka. USA (Last updated- November 2009) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ce.html Civil Society Forum on the Supplementary Report for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. 2008. Supplementary Reports to the Third and Fourth Periodic Reports of the States Party of Sri Lanka. Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2008. Consideration of Reports Submitted by State Parties Under Article 44 of the Convention: Sri Lanka. Committee on the Rights of the Child. 2003. Concluding Observations: Sri Lanka, UNCRC/C/15/Add.207, 2 July 2003.

D Sandor.1998. 'How High - How Far? The Best Interests Principle in Family Law', No 19 Australian Children's Rights News

De Silva, K.M. 1981. A Short History of Sri Lanka. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Department of Census and Statistics in Sri Lanka. 2009. Statistical data Sheet 2009. Ministry of Finance and Planning, Colombo, Sri Lanka Department of Census and Statistics, Sri Lanka. 2009. Education- Schools and University. http://www.statistics.gov.lk/education/school_university.pdf

Freeman, M. 1997. 'The Best Interests of the Child? Is the Best Interests of the Child in the Best Interests of the Children?, 11 International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 360

Goonesekere, S. 1993. Child Labour in Sri Lanka: Learning from the Past. International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland. Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL). 1978. The Constitution of Sri Lanka GOSL. 2006. School Census -2006 Preliminary Report. Sri Lanka: Ministry of Education. http://www.statistics.gov.lk/education/SUMMARY%20TABLES%202006.pdf GOSL. 2007. Key Health Indicators. 2007. Sri Lanka: Ministry of Health. http://203.94.76.60/AHB2007/SF/5%20Key%20Health%20Indicators.pdf GOSL. 2007.Education Statistics- Schools and University. Sri Lanka: Department of Census and Statistics (Last updated- August 2007)

80

GOSL. 2009. Annual Health Statistics 2007. Sri Lanka: Management development and planning unit of the department of Health services. Ministry of Health, www.heath.gov.lk Human Development Report. 2009. Sri Lanka’s Human Development Index. United Nations Development Programme. http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/country_fact_sheets/cty_fs_LKA.html International Labour Organization. 2009. IPEC Sub regional Information System on Child Labour. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/region/asro/newdelhi/ipec/responses/srilanka/index.htm

Kent, G. 1994. Children's right to adequate nutrition in Food and Nutrition Bulletin. Volume 15 (1993/1994), Number 4, December 1994. The United Nations University Press http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food/8f154e/8F154E0d.htm

Laerke, J. 2005. Child Friendly Schools. Trincomalee: Unicef. http://www.unicef.org/srilanka/reallives_1714.htm Lees, M and Wilkie, M. 1999. Best Interest of the Child. Human Rights Brief no. 1. Australian Human Rights Commission. http://www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/briefs/brief_1.html Management Development and Planning Unit of the Department of Health Services. 2009. Annual Health Statistics 2007. Sri Lanka: Ministry of Health. www.heath.gov.lk Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment. http://www.childwomenmin.gov.lk/web/index.php?lang=en Ministry of Education, Statistics Branch. 2006. School Census -2006 Preliminary Report. Sri Lanka: Ministry of Education. http://www.statistics.gov.lk/education/school_university.pdf Ministry of Health. 2007. Key Health Indicators. Sri Lanka : Ministry of Health http://203.94.76.60/AHB2007/SF/5%20Key%20Health%20Indicators.pdf Nathan Associates. 2006. Sri Lanka Economic Performance Assessment. USAID. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADH748.pdf National Child Protection Authority of Sri Lanka. 2010. Functions of the NCPA http://www.childprotection.gov.lk/functions.html National Council of Economic Development. 2009. MGDs in Sri Lanka. http://www.mdg.lk/inpages/thegoals/goal5_improve_maternal_health.shtml National Dangerous Drugs Control Board of Sri Lanka. 2007. Drug abuse situation in 2007. Sri Lanka: NDDCB. http://www.nddcb.gov.lk/Publications/Drug%20Situation.pdf National Water Supply and Drainage Board. 2007. Annual Report 2007. National Water Supply and Drainage Board of Sri Lanka.

81

National Water Supply and Drainage Board. 2007. National Water Supply and Drainage Board Corporate Plan 2007-2011. Ministry of Water Supply and Drainage Office of the United nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 1996. Concluding observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child : Sri Lanka, 21/06/95. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/CRC.C.15.Add.40.En?OpenDocument Probation and child care department.2010. Services of Probation and Child Care Department. http://www.probation.gov.lk/english/english_services.html Probation and Child Care Department. 2006. Statistical Report 2006. http://probation.gov.lk/download/Statistics%20-2006.pdf Ravi. P Rannan- Eliya and Associates Ltd. 2007. Population Ageing and Health expenditure 2001- 2101. Institute for Health Policy. http://www.un.org/esa/analysis/wess/wess2007files/backgroundpapers/srilanka.pdf#15 Remnant, F. and Cader A.A. 2008. The Multiple Dimensions of Child Poverty in Sri Lanka. Colombo: Centre for Poverty Analysis Right to Education Project. 2008. Clear Definition of Duty Bearers. http://www.right-to-education.org/node/74. Save the Children programme for South and Central Asia. Save the Children’s Definition on child protection for effective Child Rights Programming in South and Central Asia. Katmandu. Save the Children Sweden. http://sca.savethechildren.se/PageFiles/3189/child%20protection%20definition%20SC.pdf Shrestha, B. , Karkara R. and Karlsson, L. 2006. Demystifying Non-Discrimination for Effective Child Rights Programming, Save the Children Sweden. SLBFE. 2009. Annual Statistical Report of Foreign Employment 2008. Sri Lanka Bureau for Foreign Employment http://www.slbfe.lk/downloads/Annual%20Statistical%20Report%202008%20-%20SLBFE.pdf UN. 1994. Initial reports of States parties due in 1993: Sri Lanka. (UN Doc. CRC/C/8/Add.13) UNICEF. 2010. Child protection from violence, exploitation and abuse: Children without parental care http://www.unicef.org/protection/index_orphans.html UNICEF. 2007. Sri Lanka Statistics. http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/sri_lanka_statistics.html#52 UNICEF. 2009. The State of the World’s Children 2009, United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, NY.

82

UNICEF. 2009. The State of the World’s Children: Maternal and Newborn Health. New York: Unicef Wikipedia. 2009. Vedda People. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedda_people Wikipedia. 2009 Sri Lanka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lanka World Health Organisation. 2006. Mortality Country Fact Sheet 2006. World Health Organisation

83

Annex 1: Baseline locations

District Divisional Secretariat Grama Niladhari Division

Colombo Panchikawatte

Suduwella (Johnson Watte)

Colombo

Hunupitiya (175 Watte)

Dematagoda (Mahavilawatte)

Halgahakumbura

Thimbirigasyaya

Fathimawatte

Matara N'Pura

Denagama East

Allewela East

Garanduwa

Matara

Anuradhapura Madyama Nuwaragam Palatha

Helabagaswewa

Ookkulama

Viharapalugama

Ipalogama Vijithapura

Ampara Aligambay

Weeramunai

Mayadipalli

Central Camp 2

Palamunai

Batticaloa Manchan H

Munaithiru

Kanchirankudah

Arumugathan Kudiyaruppu

Kiran East

Jaffna Tholpuram West

Kuppilan

Chavatkattu

Kondavil

Alaveddi

84

Annex 2: Descriptions of baseline locations

Colombo: Colombo District is a project location for the Core Group member Forut. Colombo was considered due to population density and representation of the urban poor. The areas considered for the RCR baseline survey could be considered the most urbanised areas of Sri Lanka with a characteristically high population density and large numbers of low-income dwellings in small land areas. Typically, these households have a relatively higher income range compared to households in urban poor and other marginalized settings due to opportunities in the highly commercialized environment. However, income could be irregular, expenditure patterns high, and services reach these communities minimally. There are also attitudinal barriers which work against service providers approaching these communities. The villages considered for the project were Panchikawatte, Suduwella, Hunupitiya, Dematagoda, Halgahakumbura and Fathimawatte. Sinhalese, Tamil and Moor populations live in all these villages and interact with one another. Matara: Matara is a working area of Save the Children in Sri Lanka and the areas considered for the RCR baseline survey represent urban populations, rural populations as well as estate populatioins. N‘Pura could be considered the only community in the sample representing the estate sector labour population, a sector which has large low-income labour populations working in tea, rubber, coconut and other plantation estates, usually living in poorly equipped plantation housing provided by plantation owners. Most of this population was Tamil in ethnicity. In the Matara divisional secretariat, the survey population was an urban population, both Tamil and Sinhala, whereas the Garanduwa, Allewela East and Denagama East acould be considered as typical rural Sinhalese villages Anuradhapura is a project location for Forut and comprises rural poor communities. All areas covered for the baseline in the Anuradhapura District are extremely rural areas which are almost entirely isolated from mainstream society and towns. Helabagaswewa is the most rural area and is in the fringe of Anuradhapura Dsitrict. Most of the areas barely have road systems and are non-motorable. Other areas of Anuradhapura District considered for the survey were Ookkulama, Viharapalugama and Vijithapura. 100% of the population covered under the survey are Sinhala, and mostly Buddhist. Ampara is a Save the Children project location and the villages considered for the survey were Aligambay, Weeramunai, Mayadipalli, Central camp 2 and Palamunai. Most of the areas covered were typical rural populations representing 60 Tamil and 40% Moor/ Malay populations, and one village comprising of a Telugu-speaking formerly itinerant community. Most of these population groups can be considered typical rural Muslim and Eastern Tamil populations. Batticaloa is once again a Save the Children project location was considered for the survey as it represents the typical rural Tamil and rural Muslim populations who experienced the impact of the military conflict either directly or indirectly. Manchan and Arumugathan Kudiyaruppu can be considered urban areas whereas Munaithiru, Kanchirankudah and Kiran East could be considered predominantly rural villages. Manchan was represented with some children in post-war IDP camps. Jaffna is a Save the Children project location. Jaffna's Child rights situatioin is represented with children in Tholpuram West, Kuppilan, Chavatkattu, Kondavil and Alaveddi. 82% of the chiledren considered for the study represented rural areas whereas 18-19% represented children in IDP camps in Tholpuram West and Alaveddi. 100% of the sample in Jaffna were Tamil and were affected directly or indirectly due to war.

85

Annex 3: Sample stratification for marginalized groups by GN division

District

GN Division

Village

Urban/rural estate

Children in institutions

Reintegrated children

Children in rem

and

homes

Children with disability

IDP children

Non-School Going

children

Working children

Street children

Other marginalized

Total

Kandy44 Panwila Kandeketiya R 3 3 16 22

Hatale E 4 3 16 23

Doluwa Hunugola R 3 16 19

Palledelthota R 16 16

Dethota Uduwela R 4 16 20

SUB-TOTAL 0 0 0 6 0 8 8 6 80 100

Colombo Colombo Panchikawatte U x x 9 9

Suduwella U 9 9

Hunupitiya U 9 9

Thimbirigasyaya Dematagoda U x x 9 9

Halgahakumbura U X 9 9

Fathimawatte U X 0

SUB-TOTAL

Matara Matara N’Pura R/E 10 5 15 30

Denagama East R 5 20 25

Allewela East R 20 20

Garanduwa Semi-U

15 15

Matara U 10 10

SUB-TOTAL Matara 0 0 0 5 0 10 5 0 80 100

Anuradhapura Madhyama Nuwaragam Palatha

Helabagaswewa 6 6 30 42

Ookulama 28 28

Viharapalugama 30 30

Vijithapura 0

SUB-TOTAL Anu 80 100

Ampara Aligambay 3 1 3 1 12 42

Weeramunai 2 1 1 16 20

Mayadipalli 1 1 18 20

Central Camp 2 5 1 2 1 11 20

Palamunai 1 1 18 20

SUB-TOTAL Ampara 100

Batticaloa Manchan H U 1 1 1 1 11 20

Munaithiuv R 1 1 1 5 1 1 15 20

Kanchirankudah R 1 1 1 1 1 15 20

Arumugathan Kudiyarippu

U 1 1 1 1 1 15 20

Kiran East R 1 2 1 1 1 14 20

SUB-TOTAL Batticaloa 100

Jaffna T Tholupuram West 2 10 8 20

Kuppilan 3 2 5 10 20

Chavalkattu 5 3 5 7 20

Kondavil 5 15 20

Alaveddi 5 5 10 20

5 5 5 5 15 10 5 0 50 100

30 15 15 37 20 43 32 20 448 700

44 Kandy was selected as a baseline location but the baseline was not implemented in Kandy.

child rights baseline sri lanka 2009

Documents