ACERWC is trying to come up with a framework to address when recommendations are not implemented. There are examples of Countries that do implement the recommendations and also examples when they do not. The ACERWC continues to work with them to encourage them to implement the recommendations. c. A participant emphasized the need to harmonize laws around corporal punishment and the Committee explained this is was something they are advocating for. Another participant asked what the Committee is doing about the case of Indians and citizenship rights of the Makonde in Kenya and the Committee explained that this is not an issue that has been brought to them. They can only address issues brought to them. d. On the issue of the ratification of the ACRWC, the representative from South Sudan shared that the relevant documents are with the Council of Ministers since 2016 to encourage the Government to ratify the Charter. It is not clear why it is taking so long; however, part of the problem is the Ministers have not met to discuss this. The ACERWC agreed to follow up with this after this workshop. e. Participants were asked to encourage people to use the communications mechanism and submit reports to the ACERWC. They mentioned that CSOs have many challenges with collaboration and often work in silos. Participants expressed the need for the Committee to popularize what they do so people can be more familiar regarding their role and the reporting mechanisms. f. The ACERWC shared that they will be doing more of this starting with holding a workshop in December on litigation on children’s rights using the AU mechanisms. CSOs are not using the mechanisms of the Committee adequately and it is the same organizations submitting reports and not utilizing all the mechanisms that exist. g. Another participant expressed that forums like these are not very accessible to a lot of people and to other CSOs. There tends to be a domination by the larger INGOs and smaller CSOs/NGOs and those working at the grassroots level are usually not invited to be a part of meetings like these. Children’s voices and their experiences are not adequately represented through the CSOs in these fora and often all children are lumped under the same category as though they have the same needs and issues whereas different groups of children require different interventions and protections because of their circumstances. We need to think about how we can make these mechanisms more accessible and collaborative so all voices are heard for the different needs of children. It was explained that the ACERWC has a limited mandate so they don’t actually consult with children directly. Their main mandate is dealing with state parties and CSOs, so we need to see how we can ensure there is more diversity in the representation amongst CSOs. It is a valid point in that we are addressing children’s rights but don’t include as much the voices of children who live the experiences. We need to continue to