CENTROS RESIDENCIALES PARA PERSONAS CON DISCAPACIDAD

To address issues of the effects of war and protection of children, the question is asked: What legal frameworks exist globally and nationally to support social reintegration of former child soldiers and community structures to provide sustainable support? It was necessary in this study to focus on the legal frameworks

193 that protected children in armed conflicts and discussed international frameworks where the International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law provisions, were stipulated.

It has been highlighted that the standards to protect children involved in armed conflict are to be found in relevant international provisions in International Humanitarian Laws, International Human Rights Laws, International Jurisprudence, UN Security Council resolutions, International conventions like the UNCRC, optional protocol to the CRC of children in armed conflict and the International Labour Organisation Convention 182. There are also continental and regional legislations like the African Charter on the rights and Welfare of the Child and the ECOWAS child protection policy.

There are also international standards like the Integrated Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration Standards and the Paris Principles that spell out best practices for social reintegration programming for CAAFAG.

At national level the Liberian Government enacted a children‟s law which provides a framework for future social reintegration, this was passed in 2011 after the recently concluded DDRR programme. The Children‟s law of Liberia (2011: part xi, sections 3 to 7) recommends establishing Child Welfare Committees in every community or town with an overall function to advance the realization of the rights of the child at the community or town level.

This law, however, does not take cognisance of the existing community structures which have continued to play a fundamental role in care and protection of children. Further still the Liberian Children‟s law, Section 5: 44 states that:

“The powers and functions of a Child Welfare Committee shall be limited to advice, mediation, recommendations, and representation and in no event shall a Child Welfare Committee conduct a trial or pass a sentence against any person.”

194 This runs contrary to the role of community structures as social institutions, which are supposed to play a role in addressing deviance in society to maintain social order and social cohesion. The legalistic provisions do not empower the community structures to support CAAFAG in the socialisation process.

Beyond the inclusion of the structures in the Liberian children‟s law 2011, there was very limited evidence to the inclusion of social reintegration in the post-conflict programmes. The quote below by one of the NGO staff, illustrates the status of Child Welfare Committees”,

“The CWCs do not report to government, neither the community. They are just hanging”.

It was reported in Nimba County that with introduction of Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS), the counties were required to report according to relevant pillars, such as the rule of law and governance pillar amongst others. The structures did not know to which pillar to report to and were confused. This is what one NGO staff member observed:

“There are changes of reporting at county level. We are required to report according to

pillars. We do not know in which pillar the CWCs fall”.

The failure to link or connect community structures to government institutions and programmes, partly explains why there was limited policy focus on CWCs and social reintegration as a whole, in the post-conflict planning.

5.10 CONCLUSION

The findings indicated that all six research questions were addressed and answered in this research study. It explicitly showed that tentative hypotheses have been confirmed through data gathering, thus building theory regarding community structures in Liberia. It was proved that children of all ages in Liberia were recruited by armed groups and

195 armed forces, since it was found that they were not passive, innocent observers of war and political change, but resilient participants. The children joined the fighting forces for a number of reasons, which ranged from social, economic, political, desperateness, and self-protection against abuse. The study findings showed children went through very difficult experiences, they watched and supervised over violence. The war disoriented children‟s lives. They acquired or socialized values that were not acceptable when they returned. The children copied negative behavior and had to rely on a constructed community that composed of commanders and other child soldiers. The pattern of relationships continued even after their return to the communities, among peers and with commanders.

In some situations they returned to dysfunctional communities, without adequate support systems. The return was to the extended relatives like uncles, aunties, grandparents and a few resorted to independent living. Their lives were disrupted, they could not continue with education as others returned without legs and arms, while others had been wounded. The physical trauma on children was a profound effect of the war on the children.

The findings showed a great number of children who were formerly demobilized, accessing one of the two reintegration options, namely to go back to school and have formal education or to receive skills training to equip them to work for themselves.

The Child Welfare Committees that were formed at the onset were the mainly used reintegrating structure. There was very minimal involvement of other structures in the community itself. The programmes were mainly run by the NGOs. This denied the children to be key community actors in the reintegration process. There was no connection with community structures to assist, while there was very limited linkage or connection with local government structures in the counties to support reintegration of child soldiers.

196 The structures formed with reintegration mostly ceased to operate when funding stopped towards the programme. The coverage was limited in scope, as most CWCs tended to be situated along the main roads, with limited presence in the interior of the counties. The training that was received was not structured and it was once-off, without a clear training needs assessment done beforehand to establish real needs of children during and after reintegration.

The findings pointed to a very limited capacity building of the structures and limited funding and training were given and received. There was no sufficient investment in the structures to enable them to operate efficiently after the reintegration programme. The Liberian Children‟s law, Section 5: 44 promulgated in 2011 did not make provision or take cognisance of the existing community structures which have continued to play a fundamental role in care and protection of children. The situation seems bleak for Liberian child soldiers as their support systems are not supportive any more.

The next chapter will focus on the final conclusion and final recommendations in an endeavor to rectify these problems.

197

CHAPTER 6