“Children first” is a statement typical of show business politics. It sounds pretty, it lacks content, but it has the virtue that everyone understands it and assimilates it according to their own principles, values and identification with some public policy.
If to the previous sentence we add that “the best interests of the child” should always be sought, it sounds even better and closes the conversation. It leaves no room for discussion about what it means to put children and young people first, let alone what the best interests of the child are and how they are applied.
According to UNICEF, the driving force behind the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), it defines the best interests of children and adolescents as “a right, a principle and a rule of procedure, based on an assessment of all the elements of the best interests of a child or children in a given situation” and adds that “the aim is to ensure the full and effective enjoyment of all the rights recognised by the CRC and the holistic development of the child”.
The constitutional proposal of the Committee of Experts states in Article 14 that: “The Constitution recognises and ensures the best interests of children and adolescents and the conditions for them to grow and develop in a family”, but there is no precision as to what this means.
The proposed amendments also fail to contribute and rather contribute to confusion by subordinating the best interests of the child to the criteria of parents or caregivers without any reference to their rights. Moreover, another amendment will enshrine constitutional supremacy, which means that the Constitution should take precedence over international treaties and conventions that Chile has signed or will sign in the future.
The Defensoría de la Niñez in its contribution to the constitutional discussion sums it up very well when it points out that: “In general terms, the constitutional proposal does not effectively incorporate the recognition of the human rights of children and adolescents. Likewise, there is no formal recognition of children and adolescents as subjects of rights or as citizens, that is, as holders who fully enjoy all the human rights recognised by the international treaties in force, the current Constitution and the laws.
To those who are uncomfortable with the rights approach and argue that “where are the duties”, it is good to remind them that a right is an agreement between members of a society, which is expressed in a normative and institutional framework that regulates their relations. A specific right is enshrined when society considers that the conduct or conducts that affect people’s dignity should be avoided and therefore condemned.
Unfortunately, the political discussion around the constitutional proposal is far from addressing these dimensions of life in society; however, we should not lose hope that we can discuss the meaning of the phrase “best interests of the child or adolescent”. This is a good opportunity to do so in the classroom regardless of the grade or level, since listening to children is also a right enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
