8 Refugee Law Initiative Working Paper 76 cial social group.39 States, through their judiciary, must ensure all children are guaranteed the right to be heard.40 The litigant strategy must assure “the views of the child” are “given due weight” and the child is “provided the opportunity to be heard” in any relevant proceedings.41 The CRC Committee has stressed an urgency for adherence to the right to be heard for those children involved with immigration proceedings which often encompass stateless children.42 Some argue that certain courts’ procedural rules – such as the ECtHR – should be revised to prevent the abuse of child rights and to better ensure children’s views are genuinely represented in each case.43 Legal instruments are in place in Europe to protect this vulnerable population and these rights. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, for example, provides the right for children’s views to be “taken into consideration on matters which concern them in accordance with their age and maturity.”44 Perhaps the most significant instrument, however, is the CRC. One hundred ninety-six countries are parties to the CRC, including all UN members except for the United States. Thus, all Council of Europe and EU Member States are parties to the CRC. The “EU is bound to adhere to the CRC’s principles and provisions in relation to any EU activity affecting children.”45 Several articles within the CRC protect child litigants, notably those pertaining to discrimination, the best interests of the child, the right to a nationality, the right to be heard, and the right to be protected from maltreatment.46 The best interests of the child, which encompasses a right to be heard, is a principle enshrined in CRC Article 3, EU Charter Article 24(2), ECHR Article 8, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The CRC Committee considers the principle to be a “substantive right”, a “fundamental, interpretative legal principle”, and a “rule of procedure.”47 This principle obliges states to ensure that both the judiciary and the private sector – “including those providing services”48 – prioritize and examine a child’s best interests, which include having a voice in proceedings. The CRC Committee underscored this point by observing that “there can be no correct application of article 3 [best interests] if the components of article 12 [the right to be heard] are not respected.”49 To meet children’s best interests within their right to be heard, “they should receive information about the proceedings and what is expected from them.”50 Stateless children specifically must be “included in decision-making processes.”51 In many cases involving childhood statelessness, however, litigants often are infants or toddlers and incapable of articulating their views. Nevertheless, these “very young children have the same rights as all children to have their best interests assessed, even if they cannot express their views or represent themselves in the same way as older children.”52 Despite this pledged protection of a child’s right to be heard, allegations of violations persist. 2.2 Particularities of Childhood Statelessness In addition to child protection laws, there are obligations to which several European states must adhere pertaining specifically to statelessness under the 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions, the 1997 Euro39 Nolan (n 23). 40 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 (CRC), art 12; UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC Committee), ‘General comment No. 12 (2009): The right of the child to be heard (20 July 2009) <https://www.refworld.org/docid/4ae562c52.html> accessed 17 March 2025. 41 CRC (n 40) arts 12(1), 12(2). 42 CRC Committee (n 40). 43 Fenton-Glynn (n 18). 44 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union [2007] 2012/C 326/02, art 24(1). 45 Stalford (n 15) 215. 46 CRC (n 40) arts 2, 3, 7, 12, 19. 47 UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC Committee), ‘General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (art. 3, para. 1)’ (29 May 2013), para 6. 48 CRC Committee (n 47) para 14(c). 49 CRC Committee (n 40) para 74. 50 Rap (n 27). 51 CRC Committee (n 40) para 124. 52 ibid para 44.