Chapter 8 evaluates in detail UNICEF Rwanda’s approach, exploring risks, criticisms and limitations: did interpreting the standards in a context-specific way (which included prioritisation and progressively working towards implementation and compliance) weaken the normative content of the standards? Did UNICEF Rwanda’s broadly collaborative and constructive (rather than coercive) approach risk usurpation, co-option and compromised independence? Responding to these challenges, the chapter finds that UNICEF Rwanda, whilst pragmatic, remained true to child rights principles and retained its independence. The chapter then presents examples of where the empirical data (using process tracing) suggest that UNICEF Rwanda exerted a positive influence on Rwanda’s implementation of, or compliance with, international standards. It also analyses the factors that influenced UNICEF Rwanda (the Rwandan context itself, the nature of the CRC and UNICEF’s institutional particularities) so as to situate its approach in the broader context. The chapter concludes that UNICEF Rwanda’s pragmatic yet principled approach was overall appropriate and achieved some positive results, although there were shortcomings, and that this approach may be an appropriate means of operationalising international juvenile justice standards (or human rights standards more generally) in a post-conflict society.

Chapter 9 synthesises the main findings of the study and gestures towards the implications of the research on a broader level as well as questions raised. It draws insights for advances in theories on human rights promotion in post-conflict societies, making the case for principled pragmatism: an approach predicated on contextual interpretation and application of standards whilst remaining true to human rights principles, and on the use of constructive and collaborative strategies and techniques in policy development and advocacy. The chapter presents lessons that can be learned from Rwanda: how children’s involvement in violent crimes can dramatically influence the perception of childhood, a factor which should be taken into account when seeking to promote child rights at the community level; whether the prosecution of children was preferable to non-prosecution; whether UNICEF was right to become involved with the issue of child perpetrators in Rwanda; and what approaches to child perpetrators UNICEF should be promoting, briefly exploring alternative modalities of accountability, including truth-seeking and indigenous justice and reconciliation mechanisms. Whilst affirming the role of UNICEF, it concludes by emphasising that ultimately it is the state that decides on accountability and that is responsible for implementation of, and compliance with, international standards.