From Emerging Rights to Enduring Relevance

Summary

In the 25 years that I have been studying, researching and teaching courses on children’s rights, much has changed. The academic scholarship has expanded greatly, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has been relentless in the adoption of its concluding observations and general comments, and issues such as climate change, advancements in digital technologies and Covid-19 have created new challenges for the realisation of children’s rights. Within this dynamic and constantly shifting landscape, the scholarship of John Eekelaar has endured. Rare is the occasion when an article I write does not draw on his insights, and never has it been the case that the course materials I prepare for my students do not include his work. Why is this so?

The invitation to contribute to this contribution in honour of John’s work has given me pause to reflect on why his work occupies such a strong and enduring role in my own thinking on children’s rights. What follows, then, is an account of these reflections on some of the key contributions of John’s work on children’s rights as I see them. It is necessarily idiosyncratic, and others will no doubt have differing perspectives, as may John himself. But for me, the legacy and enduring relevance of his contribution arises from two sources.

First, his scholarly attention and contribution across three intersecting themes: a historical account of the development of children’s rights, a theoretical justification for this concept, and a working account of how to translate this concept into practice. His decision to address each of these areas serves as a reminder to students, academics and practitioners alike of the critical importance in understanding the interconnected nature of history, theory and practice when seeking to explore, develop and refine the idea of children’s rights. Knowing where this idea came from, and how it can be justified, can only serve to strengthen an understanding of how it could, or should, be applied in practice.

The second reason I continue to engage with and share John’s work relates to the rigour of his scholarship and the methodology he adopts.