European States’ Obligations to Repatriate the Children Detained in Camps in Northeast Syria obligation to provide support to the parents so they can resume their parental responsibilities and restore or enhance the family’s capacity to take care of the child.484 If a child’s separation from their parents becomes necessary, the decision-makers must ensure that the child maintains relations with their parents and family unless this is contrary to the child’s best interests. 485 These legal requirements apply regardless of whether a child has been recognized as a refugee or has crossed a national border.486 In some circumstances, States may also have positive obligations inherent in ensuring effective “respect” for family life, 487 which requires States to not only refrain from actions which could result in family separation or other arbitrary interference in the right to family life, but also take positive measures to maintain the family unit, including the reunion of separated family members.488 The importance of family reunification in international law, in particular in relation to reuniting children with their parents, is reflected in treaties, case law, resolutions, and other international instruments.489 This may require States to trace the parents or other family members of children in order to obtain information necessary for reunification.490 Finally, while it is indispensable to carry out the assessment and determination of the child’s best interests in the context of potential 484 Ibid, para. 61. 485 Ibid, para. 65. 486 UNODC, “Handbook on Children Recruited and Exploited by Terrorist and Violent Extremist Groups: The Role of the Justice System”, pp. 131-132. 487 See ECtHR cases where the Court has found States have a positive obligation under Article 8 of the ECHR to admit persons to its territory for family reunification: ECtHR, “Sen v. Netherlands,” Application No. 31465/96, 21 December 2001, para. 29-42; ECtHR, “Tuquabo-Tekle and Ors v. Netherlands,” Application No. 60665/00, 1 March 2006, para. 41-42; ECtHR, “Mubilanzila Mayeka And Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium,” Application No. 13178/03, 12 October 2006, para. 82. 488 CMW and CommRC, “Joint General Comment No. 4 (2017) of the CMW and No. 23 (2017) of the CRC on State Obligations Regarding the Human Rights of Children in the Context of International Migration in Countries of Origin, Transit, Destination and Return,” CMW/C/GC/4-CRC/C/GC/23, 16 November 2017, para. 27; ECtHR, “El Ghatet v. Switzerland,” Application No. 56971/10, 8 February 2017, para. 43. 489 UDHR, Article 16(3); ICCPR, Article 23; ICESCR, Article 10(1); CRC, Articles 10 and 22; Geneva Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (1949), Article 27 (1); UNHCR, “Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement,” 22 July 1998, ADM 1.1, PRL 12.1, PR00/98/109, Principle 17(3); UNGA, “Resolution on the Rights of the Child,” 20 February 1997, A/RES/51/77, para. 42; Commission on Human Rights, “Resolution on the Rights of the Child,” 28 April 1999, E/CN.4/RES/1999/80, para. 21(c); UNHCR, Executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme, “Family Reunification No. 24 (XXXII) – 1981,” conclusion endorsed by the Executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme upon the recommendation of the SubCommittee of the Whole on International Protection of Refugees, Conclusion No. 24 (XXXII); ICRC, “Customary International Humanitarian Law Database, Rule 105 on Respect for the Family Life”; ECtHR, “Gnahoré v. France,” Application No. 40031/98, 17 January 2001, para. 59. 490 UNODC, “Handbook on Children Recruited and Exploited by Terrorist and Violent Extremist Groups: The Role of the Justice System,” pp. 131-132. 82