Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
The issue of child soldiers, their role in armed conflicts, and the consequences of their exposure to traumatic stress. It also discusses the importance of cognitive and moral development in the context of child soldiering. The text emphasizes the need to change laws and international standards to prevent child recruitment and ensure the rebuilding of children's lives. It also provides a brief overview of the global humanitarian discourse on child soldiering.
Typology: Study notes
1 / 87
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Abstract The recruitment of children into military entities and their participation in warfare has increased in the past 20 years (Bloom, 2018) with an estimated 300,000 children worldwide identifying as members of armed forces (Kohrt, Rai, and Maharjan, 2015). A child soldier is considered as anyone under the age of 18 who is part of any regular or irregular armed forces. The popular image of child soldiers depicts them as vulnerable victims of violent conflict. Several studies have illustrated that children join armed forces ‘voluntarily’. Legal instruments, relevant to child rights, demonstrate ambiguities and fail to acknowledge children’s cognitive and moral development to give ‘voluntary’ consent to military recruitment and other types of armed groups. This work aims to determine whether children possess the ability to give informed consent to recruitment. To that end, Piaget’s cognitive and moral developmental theories and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory were integrated into the analysis of children’s cognitive ability to consent and their capabilities to give informed ‘voluntary’ consent in context settings of armed conflict. It was found that children’s cognitive and moral development only allows for decision making judgments when they are in their adolescent ages, 12 years and above. Yet, they understand the difference between ‘just’ and ‘unjust’ acts of moral behavior from as young as 6 years. Additionally, the socio-economic context of armed conflict that child soldiers are usually brought up in creates a barrier for ‘voluntary’ recruitment to be perceived as children genuinely giving informed ‘voluntary’ consent to join military services. In the presence of war, becoming a child soldier is the best available option for some children. Therefore, ‘voluntary’ recruitment into military service cannot be considered to be a ‘voluntary’ consent by children as they are presented with a no-choice situation. A number of policy recommendations are subsequently given with the crucial aim of preventing children’s participation in armed conflict.
“Children, my dear brother, are the best fighters of the century. They have more energy than old people. They resist without feeling physical pain” (Della,2011).^1 Children are humans and have rights, for this very reason, they have a right to dignity (Archer, 2018). Protecting children all over the world, particularly those in armed conflict, is one of the most pressing human rights issues in contemporary society (Child Soldiers International, 2018). With the increase of ‘new wars’ children have become the focus of recruitment due to the creation of light and automatic weapons, enabling the usage for children (Kaldor, 2013). Besides, it is cheaper for the respective armed groups and organizations to recruit children as opposed to adults (Schauer and Elbert, 2010). In such a context, children are vulnerable to the recruitment of armed forces. Yet, as long as political leaders are more interested in military strategies and potential gains rather than the wellbeing of the child the participation of children in warfare will continue. Legislative documents that have been set in place to ensure the best interest of the child have established principles, guidelines, and regulations on the best implementation strategies (Archer, 2018). Conventions have epitomized a utopia for child rights, the guidelines and implementations outlined in the conventions are blemished, and crucial factors on children’s cognitive and moral development are disregarded (Hannum, 2016). Consequently, creating significant ambiguities within conventions that will be scrutinized throughout this thesis. To begin with, a statistical overview of the representation of children in armed conflicts will be given to provide a perspective on the relevance of the issue at hand. Worldwide more than 240 million children are living in countries affected by conflict; children face grave violence, displacement, hunger, and exploitation by armed forces (Child Soldiers International, 2018). In 2017 alone, the UN Secretary-General named 56 armed groups and 7 state forces that are guilty of child recruitment. In South Sudan, over the past 4 years, 19,000 children have been recruited by armed forces. Since the latest conflict started, 6 years ago, in the Central African Republic, an approximated 14,000 children have been recruited by armed forces. Since 2016, there have been at least 18 conflicts around the world where children participated in hostilities. Additionally, the exploitation (^1) Quoted by Lucien, a former child soldier from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). For further information see: Della (2011). Child Soldiers – Humanium. Available at: https://www.humanium.org/en/child- soldier/
of girls and their association with armed forces has been steadily rising. Since 2012, the number of children used in armed conflict around the world has doubled, with a 159% increase and 30, recruitment cases verified (Matthews, 2019). The International Labour Office (2003) estimates that there are more than 300,000 children under the age of 18, worldwide, who are recruited, to participate in armed conflict. Although, Hart (2006:217) proclaimed that “the total number of child soldiers in each country, let alone the global figure, is not only unknown but unknowable”, due to the unlawful nature of child recruitment (Mekki and Saheb, 2017). Nonetheless, Matthews (2019) argues that this increase is partly due to improvements in verification methods, yet, these numbers are not absolute and are difficult to collect in conflict zones. The growing prevalence of children in armed conflict is alarming and creates major issues within national and international communities. Despite legal prohibitions, the use of child soldiers in armed conflicts has risen in the past 20 years (Bloom, 2018). For these reasons, it is essential to investigate children’s capabilities to give informed consent to ‘voluntary’ recruitment into armed forces. It is crucial to change national laws and international standards, to work with governments, the UN, NGO’s, and the affected communities and children in order to identify and implement effective practical measures to prevent child recruitment, and to ensure children who escape or are released from armed groups and armed forces can rebuild their lives’ (Child Soldiers International, 2018:7). The process would result in actions that are essential to cease the existence of child recruitment and exploitation. Yet, to discontinue these trends, measures must be taken to improve prevention and assistance at the international, national, and local levels. Matthews (2019) alludes that because not all countries are in the same position economically, politically, and socially the one-size-fits-all approach cannot be regarded as preventative or an assisting strategy. Families and communities are fundamental to prevention methods, and returning children need to be supported by their communities. This thesis will present a compelling case in the reconceptualization of ‘voluntary’ recruitment of child soldiers into armed entities by critically examining the primary components and assumptions of child soldiers and their ‘voluntary’ and non-voluntary recruitment into armed entities. A brief overview of the global humanitarian discourse on child soldiers will be given to allude some key issues that have set in motion the recruitment and use of children in warfare. Child soldiers may fight and experience military recruitment in ways that contemporary discourse on child soldiers is unable to capture or preempt (Lee, 2009). Subsequently, a precise definition of a ‘child soldier’ and what activities characterize them as soldiers will be given. The synergy between cognitive development and universal
The definition of a ‘child’ varies and therefore the description of child soldiers differs across countries, regions of a country and cultures (Druba, 2002). Thulin (1992) has argued that it can also differ between individuals due to cognitive growth, divergent backgrounds, responsibilities, and gender. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) in Article 1 broadly defined a child as “every human being below the age of 18 years unless, under the law applicable to the child, the majority is attained earlier”. The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1999) in Article 2 defines a child as “anyone less than eighteen years of age without exception”. Yet, the same definition cannot be applied to a child soldier as there is no universally agreed-upon age limit for children in armed conflicts (Thulin, 1992). Nonetheless, governments and non-governmental organizations concurred that children need the same, if not special, protection in armed conflicts as in all other situations, and that the age limit should prevail concordantly throughout Conventions regarding the rights of the child (Thulin, 1992). The Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers (Child Soldiers International, 2016B; CSUCS, 2019) has clarified that there is no precise definition. Nonetheless, many scholars, institutions, and conventions, such as the Paris Principles and guidelines on children associated with armed forces or armed groups (2007)^3 , which draws upon the 1997 Cape Town Principles, refers to a ‘child’ as anyone under the age of 18’ (Gallagher, 2010). This defines a ‘child’ and a ‘child soldier’ in terms of chronological age of 18. However, beyond the legal rational, the explanation does not address why anyone under the age of 18 should be considered a child and why military participation should be permitted to an 18-year-old whilst prohibited to a 17-year-old (Lee, 2009). For this thesis, a ‘child soldier’ is defined as: ‘A person who is below the age of 18 , who is attached to government armed forces or has been recruited or associated with armed forces or armed political groups in any capacity, whether or not armed conflicts are present. Child soldiers, both boys and girls, not limited to children, perform a range of tasks including, used as fighters during combat, laying mines and explosives; scouting, spying, acting as decoys, couriers or guards; logistics and support functions, portering, cooking and domestic labor; and for sexual slavery or other sexual purposes. This (^3) From here on forwards referred to as The Paris Principles (2007)
definition does not only refer to a child who is taking or has taken a direct part in hostilities.’ (International Labour Office, 2003; UNICEF, 2007; UNICEF and Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2003 ). UNICEF and the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers (2003) have elucidated that the broad definition of a ‘child soldier’ is intentional, to extend protection, under international human rights and humanitarian law, to as many children as possible and to ensure their inclusion in demobilization and reintegration programs. Inevitably, the interpretation of a ‘child soldier’ can be anything from a cook to a fierce combatant. Inevitably, this definition of a ‘child soldier’ is vague and fails to distinguish the various types and nature of work that children undertake in the military (Lee, 2009). Additionally, all children identified as ‘child soldiers’ are presumed to share fundamentally the same experiences or characteristics (Schauer and Elbert, 2010). Nonetheless, this cannot be assumed as children which are recruited or abducted are of different genders, at different ages, and abduction occurs in varying manners, and for these reasons they have divergent moral compasses^4 (Blattman and Annan, 2009); implying that each child lives in their complex reality and interprets situations differently. Furthermore, the definition of child soldiers categorizes all children under the age of 18 into one group. This poses a misperception of children’s tasks and capabilities as they extensively change between the ages of 6, youngest child observed to have been recruited, and 18, the international age for recruitment of a child (Andvig and Gates, 2007). A similar discourse may be raised for the age limit of 15. Nonetheless, the capabilities of a child changes drastically from the ages of 6 to 12 allowing children to transition and performing adult work (Andvig and Gates, 2007), including changes in active sexual behavior. Subsequently, posing a challenge for female recruitees of armed forces as they are exposed to unprotected sex. Therefore, higher chances of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and unwanted pregnancies occur (International Labour Office, 2003). (^4) Moral compass is constructed through a child’s divergent social interactions and social experiences (Smetana, 2013). Nonetheless, children’s thinking across social worlds and cultures differentiates. Yet, it incorporates the coexistence of moral, social-conventional, and personal concepts (Smetana, 2013). Kohlberg and Hersch (1977) argue that an individual’s moral compass is acquired through learning. Hence, a child’s moral development differs from an adult’s moral development. Smetana (2013) adds that it is during early childhood when children begin to focus on moral concepts, such as concrete physical harm and concerns with welfare, fairness and equality, and equal treatment. Additionally, the development of the moral compass in a child will be further explored and discussed in chapter VII – Children’s Cognitive and Moral Development vs. Environment.
Furthermore, it will allude the interpretation of childhood in perspective to cultural relativism and children’s decision-making capabilities and their portrayal as vulnerable and innocent victims of atrocities, which will be expanded on in the coming chapters.
The global humanitarian discourse on child soldiering will elaborate on the numerous instabilities that factor into the development of a child. Consequently, resulting in the recruitment and use of children in armed forces. Ethnographic research has suggested that conception of a ‘child’ is regarded differently across cultures, and what this implies for a child’s development, cognitive and physical. Additionally, it briefly raises the discussion on children’s decision-making capacities. Children being part of military services and warfare is not a new phenomenon, throughout World War II (WWII) children were used as couriers, porters, and spies (Sanders, 2011). Despite, legal prohibition on the recruitment and use of children below the age of 18, in some countries 15, it is both state armed forced and non-state armed forces that recruit children into their military entities (Thulin,1992). Nonetheless, the last few decades have constituted of dominant forms of violent conflict, represented as ‘new wars’, that have not only enabled but increased the recruitment and use of children into armed forces (Kaldor, 2013). The humanitarian discourse on child soldiering usually depicts children as vulnerable and innocent victims of violent conflicts (Schmidt, 2007). However, this is not always the case, some children ‘voluntarily’ consent to join military entities for numerous reasons, but whether it can be considered genuinely ‘voluntary’ in the context of armed conflict is debatable and will be further discussed in the upcoming chapters. Numerous instabilities factor into child development, whether that be economic instability, employment instability, child care instability, instability of education and so forth. Sandstorm and Huerta (2013:9) state that for a child to develop their ‘full potential’ it needs a “safe and stable housing, adequate and nutritious food, access to medical care, secure relationships with adult caregivers, nurturing and responsive parenting, and high-quality learning opportunities at home, in child care settings and in school”. Furthermore, education plays a crucial and critical role during the development period of children, it has been linked to both socio-emotional and cognitive gains (Carter, 2019). Shonkoff and Phillips (2000), Sandstorm and Huerta (2013) both agree that normal experience supports normal brain development, for example, good nutrition, opposed to abnormal experience such as, parental consume of alcohol and drugs, that can cause abnormal neural and behavioral development. Furthermore, there are certain necessities for a child to develop their full potential for them to become a responsible member
and what constitutes a ‘normal childhood’ embodied in the global discourse on ‘child soldiers’ is relatable to Western societies, yet, it is distant for the local lived realities (Lee, 2009). Andivg and Gates (2007) argue that children and adult behavior varies only a small degree. Therefore, it has been argued that children’s decision-making capabilities are not significantly different from those of adults (Andvig and Gates, 2007). Therefore, once children possess sufficient physical strength they are, to a degree, substituted for adults. These kinds of ideals do not conform to Western attitudes and expectations about childhood. Nonetheless, in low-income countries, children must work from an early age onwards to support their families economically or as caregivers, opposed to what is the general practice in high-income countries where priority is given to education. While children are usually limited in their physical capabilities, in comparison to adults, psychological evidence has indicated that children display certain tendencies that military leaders may find appealing.
The recruitment of child soldiers is not a new phenomenon. Children have been participating in war and conflict zones for centuries. For example, during WWII countries recruited children from the ages of 13 to be soldiers. These children were physically trained and indoctrinated with Nazi ideology, the children that had been recruited and participated have been referred to as ‘Hitler’s Youth’ (Sanders, 2011). It cannot be disregarded that there are countries that allow recruitment into the military under the age of 18. Even though they recognize a child as anyone under the age of 18; which will be further discussed and presented through legal documents in the coming chapters. However, Kaldor (2013) and Schauer and Elbert (2010) have highlighted that it is the creation of light and automatic weapons, which has increased the recruitment, use, and participation of children from much younger ages, sometimes as young as seven or eight years old. The development of ‘New Wars’ must also be considered, which have enabled the use and the rise of child soldiers in armed conflicts (Schauer and Elbert, 2010; Kaldor, 2013). ‘New Wars’ typically find justification on identities of the conflict partners, based on their affiliation to different ethnic groups, cultures, or religions (Elbert et al., 20 0 6:23). ‘New Wars’ have enabled the development of light weapons, the distribution of automatic guns suitable for children and easy to use, where only faint prior skills are needed (Schauer and Elbert, 2010). Furthermore, Elbert et al. (20 0 6) describe that it is through the targeting and frightening of civilians and expelling any civilians that do not belong to the group,
that power is obtained. Additionally, the reason for the use of children as combatants in hostilities is that it assumes that children are malleable. Therefore, easier to indoctrinate and manipulate and to shape into young, energetic, unscrupulous fighters (Elbert et al., 2016). For these reasons’ and more children have become active soldiers in conflict settings. Subsequently, Andvig and Gates (2007) have stated that the rate of child participation and child labor is higher in more rural areas of the country, due to the lack of educational and occupational opportunities in rural areas. Thulin (1992) elucidates that it is both government troops and armed non-government entities that enlist and recruit children as soldiers. Elbert et al. (20 0 6) argue that the recruitment of children is usually dominated by irregular forces^6 that intervene in civil wars on the opposing side. The strategies of recruitment encompass systematic atrocities that indubitably constitute crimes against humanity, for example kidnapping, massacres, mass rape hunting humans, mutilations, and killings amongst many more (Schauer and Elbert, 2010; Elbert et al., 20 0 6). Furthermore, Schreiber (2002) argues that the majority of all combating forces have limited military training. Hence, the recruitment of child soldiers as part of governmental or irregular forces is a persisting repertoire for most entities (Kaldor, 2013).
The global humanitarian discourse presumes that children are innocent and vulnerable due to their lack of psychological, physical, and moral capabilities (Schauer and Elbert, 2010). Associating this perception of a child conceptualizes child soldiers as victims (Schmidt, 2007). This is partially because forced recruitment is overly emphasized (Della, 2011) and child soldiers are believed to have no real agency in their military participation (Lee, 2009). Subsequently, granting child soldiers a certain amount of immunity, without accounting for the complexity of the issues and the will of the child soldiers (Della, 2011). Paradoxically, the Paris Principle (2007) in Article 3.5 states that ‘children who are accused of crimes while they were associated with armed forces or armed groups should be considered primarily as victims; not as perpetrators’, locating the cause of the phenomenon in children’s vulnerability (Lee, 2009). This framework manifests the assumption that children have no real capacity to exercise social or political choices in their recruitment and according to Schauer and Elbert (2010:317-318) their recruitment cannot be considered ‘voluntary’. Whilst, this may be true to a certain (^6) Including paramilitary units, rebel forces, mercenary troops, and foreign armies
There is an ambiguous concept that children have a special status, one that varies from the status adults receive (Schapiro,1999). The basic conception of a child is an individual who is not fully developed in some of the most fundamental ways. Nonetheless, a child has been categorized as an individual undergoing the process of development (Schapiro, 1999). Due to this ongoing development process of children adults feel a special obligation including the duty to protect, nurture, discipline, and educate them. These are paternalistic features of humans and individuals feel bound to fulfill them regardless whether or not the child consents to being protected, nurtured, disciplined, and educated. ‘Individuals think of children as people who have to be raised, whether they like it or not’ (Schapiro, 1999:716). Therefore, Schapiro (1999) has argued that children do not obtain the same significance of authority and moral consent or dissent as those of an adult. This will be demonstrated through Kant’s paradigm and the Georgetown Principles results in a detailed definition of informed consent. Kant’s paradigm will allude, as well as the Georgetown mantra of principles that will establish the perception of contemporary consent in the context of child soldiers. There are several different types of consent depending on the field of study, for this thesis informed consent will be scrutinized. The simple rationale for informed consent requires the protection, health, and welfare of participants (Eyal, 2011). Eyal (2011) states that informed consent is voluntary and “decisionally-capacitated consent”. Subsequently, informed consent requires that full disclosure of the informed practice is given and the individual understands fully what has been disclosed, and only under the basis of genuine voluntary consent can the individual participate (Eyal, 2011). If participants are deceived or not fully informed about the possible consequences, they are unable to give informed consent and it is, therefore, a violation of their rights. However, the applicability of informed consent, in the context of conflict, is problematic when appertaining it to the illegality of child soldiering. Due to children’s malleability, they become vulnerable to deception, resulting in frequent coerced recruitment. Nonetheless, Eyal (2011) discloses states that consent can only be given by a participant who is “fully competent”. Consent must be scrutinized by its components that Kant held to be autonomy and dignity. Additionally, Immanuel Kant held that “every rational being had both an innate right to freedom and a duty to enter into a civil condition governed by a social contract to realize and preserve that freedom” (Rauscher, 2007).
Coercion and deception are a part of Kant’s paradigms of “treating someone as a mere means” that is acceptable to society’s moral theories (Dougherty, 2013:719). Kant derived the categorical imperative, which he defined as the moral obligation from which other obligations and duties derive and which has turned into a universal moral law that is accessible to all humans (Donaldson, 2017). The components of autonomy and dignity, that have since been used for the purpose of informed consent, advocating the role of personal preference of the individual that needs to give consent to a given situation (Donaldson, 2017). However, Kant interpreted autonomy as an individual acting in accordance with reason. Beauchamp and Childress (2013) highlight the Georgetown mantra of principles to create principles or values of ethical decision-making, which can be applied to voluntary consent. These principles will demonstrate that it is through autonomy that an individual is perceived to have the capabilities for decision-making skills. The Georgetown mantra principles consist of four principles that have taken a universal and cross-cultural appeal. The four principles include the following – 1. Autonomy, the right for an individual to make his or her own choices; 2. Beneficence, the principle of acting with the best interest of the other in mind; 3. Nonmaleficence refers to the “do no harm” principle; and 4. Justice – has been defined as the concept that emphasizes fairness and equity among individuals (Aldcroft, 2012). From these principles, a definition of informed consent can be made. Informed consent involves a formalized process in which participants receive explanations of their purpose and duties, methods, risks, benefits, and alternatives to partake, as well as other matters before any form of formal or informal informed consent is procured. Foremost, informed consent allows and requires individuals to partake voluntarily in their duties. Informed consent, in this thesis, will be understood as ‘when a sufficiently capacitated adult does not give sufficiently informed and voluntary consent to participate in tasks or duties the intervention is impermissible’ (Eyal, 2014). The individual must give voluntary consent and cannot be “coerced by explicit or implicit means”; consent must be “freely and voluntarily given” (Sommers and Bohns, 201 9 :1962). Nonetheless, for the individual to be able to give consent it is fundamental that all duties of participation are elucidated and explained to the individual. Additionally, it is about the authority figure displaying a trustworthy and solicitous character of well-being and concern for the participating individual (Baumrind, 2015). The four Georgetown mantra principles can since then be found in the social as well as the legal aspect of human rights, which will be explained in detail in the next chapter. Not all nation states follow the principle generating a domino effect of human rights violations, particularly for children. Additionally,
Distributive justice became a topic of discussion when realizing that governments affected the distribution of economic benefits and burdens across their society (Favor and Lamont, 2017). Each society has its own economic, political, and social framework - its laws, institutions, policies, etc.- consequently differing in the distribution of benefits and burdens across members of society; resulting in human political processes that vary across societies and time (Favor and Lamont, 2017). Principles of distributive justice provide moral guidance for political processes and structures affecting the distribution of benefits and encumbrance of societies^7. Considering countries in conflict, where there are high levels of economic deficit and political unrest it automatically results in an unequal distribution of benefits and burdens (Feldman and Skow, 2015). Consequently, as the most vulnerable of the population children are the first to suffer in deprived countries. This is due to a multitude of reasons that will further be alluded throughout this thesis. Furthermore, the distributive principle is interlinked to the welfare-based principle which draws on the primary moral importance of an individual’s level of welfare (Feldman and Skow, 2015). Scholars and utilitarian’s have linked it to theory or game theory by clarifying that the consequences of individual actions are rarely determined in isolation, but rather in conjunction with the actions of many others (Sher and Hardin 1991); hence, the introduction of morality. Scanlon (2000) introduced contractualism which concerns itself with which acts are right and wrong and with what reasons and forms of reasoning they are justifiable (Ashford and Mulgan, 2007); this is where the terms “just”, right, and “unjust”, wrong, have been applied to wield the theory of legitimacy (Lovett, 2004). “Just” acts are realized through moral behaviors that are comprised of “mutual recognition”, opposed to “unjust” acts that are unjustifiable; ergo cannot be justified to others (Ashford and Mulgan, 2007). For example, the theory of “just” war, which deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought, are a set of mutually agreed rules of combat; usually evolved between two (^7) There are numerous dimensions to the distributive principle which will not be discussed in this thesis. For further information see Favor, C. and Lamont, J. (2017). Distributive Justice (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-distributive/
culturally similar enemies. This occurs when an array of values shared by two warring countries, alliances, or people, find implicitly or explicitly agreed-upon limits of warfare (Moseley, n.d). However, when the two enemies have significantly greater divergent religious beliefs, race, or language, they deem each other as “less than human”, and therefore war conventions are rarely applied (Moseley, n.d). Furthermore, portraying another individual as ‘less than human’ or a member of a sub-group or disease, also referred to as dehumanizing (Stanton, 2016), results in denying individuals their rights. “Just war” only seems to occur when enemies perceive one another as individuals that share a moral identity, with the potential of doing business when peace is established, and what rules should be applied in the aftermath of war (Moseley, n.d). The meaning of war involves the intentional infliction of harm on others, that often results in ‘disabling resources and supplies for comfortable living, forcibly imposing a new rule of law on people, and of course the injury and killing of the enemy forces’ (Scholz, 2011). Scholz (2011) explains that during war common held rights may be temporarily suspended, such as “do not kill”, not only harming enemy forces but innocent civilians. It is often prior to suspending the “do not kill” right, that military forces are recruiting for an army. However, in many countries, particularly on the African continent (Schauer and Elbert, 2010), children are recruited as part of military entities. Despite, the recruitment of child soldiers being deemed as illegal and “unjust” the recruitment is by no means justifiable. Children are individuals who have secured rights from the moment of birth. From the moment children are recruited, in most cases coerced into armed forces, a human rights violation has been set in motion. Child soldiers are deprived of essential childhood experiences that form healthy and strong relationships, and the possibility of cognitive and physical stability in the future.
Consent-based theories are currently the most popular amongst political philosophers. According to Lovett (2004), consent-based theories operate on crucial ambiguity as to whether they are supposed to be understood as voluntarist accounts of justice, as opposed to rationalist accounts. Lovett (2004) further argues that in the former case, consent-based theories fail due to their indeterminate and incoherent ways causing a superfluous in the field. Applying contractualism to the social sphere^8 , further three key (^8) Social sphere will be interpreted as an individual’s development and their expression in forming their individual identity as this is a function of the relationship people form with friends, community members, and community institutions. For more information see: Welch (2012:118-120).
