A/HRC/WG.7/2/3 II. Comments on the proposal 6. Regarding the preamble, the Committee considers that it should reflect the fact that the optional protocol must be a child-oriented instrument. It would therefore welcome language to the effect that the States parties take into due account the importance of the status of the child as subject of rights and as a human being with evolving capacities. 7. With regard to the second paragraph of the preamble, the Committee would welcome the inclusion of language by which the States parties would note that the Convention recognizes the rights set forth in it to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child’s or his or her parent’s or legal guardian’s race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status. 8. The preamble should also indicate that the existence of the protocol will reinforce and complement national and regional mechanisms, allowing children to submit complaints for violations of their rights. 9. Regarding article 1 (competence of the Committee on the Rights of the Child to receive and consider communications), the Committee suggests adding a paragraph indicating that, in all actions taken under the protocol, the Committee will favour the effective participation of the child and the fact that his or her views will be given due consideration. In view of the particular importance of time in matters relating to child protection, a further paragraph should be added indicating that the Committee will ensure the celerity of the procedure. 10. Regarding article 2 (individual communications), the Committee welcomes the comprehensive approach contemplated in the draft, including the extension of the communications procedure to any of the rights set forth in the Convention, the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography and the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict. In the Committee’s view, it is essential that no right protected under these three instruments be excluded from the ambit of the communication procedure. These rights are interrelated, interdependent and indivisible; to exclude any right would risk creating a hierarchical relationship among them. For the same reason, the Committee considers that the opt-out clause contained in paragraph 2 would be inconsistent with the obligations accepted by the States parties who have voluntarily accepted to be parties to any of these three instruments. Accordingly, when ratifying the future optional protocol, States should not be given the option to exclude any of them from its scope. 11. The Committee considers that the child should be given a role in the submission of communications. Accordingly, paragraph 1 of article 2 could be completed as follows: “Communications may be submitted by or on behalf of a child or of children, or of an individual or group of individuals, within the jurisdiction of a State party, claiming to be victims, or to have been victims when child/children, of a violation by that State party of any of the rights set forth in (…)”. 12. The Committee welcomes the inclusion in article 2 of subparagraph 5, which would require the Committee to make a determination as to whether consideration of a communication is in the best interests of the child when the author of the communication is acting on behalf of a child or group of children. However, it considers that such a determination should be limited to those situations in which, in the Committee’s view, the consent of the child or children concerned has not been clearly established. The principle of “best interests of the child” would be construed necessarily as being a matter of the general application by the Committee in its consideration of communications under the optional protocol. GE.10-16956 3