ACERWC African Committee of Experts on the Rights & Welfare of the Child these challenges. As highlighted in Joint General Comment No. 3 (2017) of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and No. 22 (2017) of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, there is a correlation between the right to non-discrimination (Article 2 of CRC), the right to survival and development and Article 27 of CRC which requires states to ensure that all children have a standard of living that is adequate for their physical, mental, spiritual and moral development.56 Thus states must guarantee that children on the move, irrespective of their status or that of their parents, have a standard of living that is adequate for their physical, spiritual, moral and mental development. In addition, focusing specifically on migration, both committees state that migration practices, policies or laws that exclude or deny adult migrants basic rights may directly or indirectly affect children’s right to life, survival and development.57 As such in accordance with Article 18 of the CRC, states should guarantee that children’s development and their best interests taken into consideration when putting in place migration policies and laws that affect their parent’s access to socio-economic and civil and political rights.58 Article 18 requires states to recognize that parents of a child have responsibilities in upbringing and development of a child. 2.1.4 Participation Article 12 of the CRC provides that states should ensure that a child who is capable of forming his or her views is guaranteed a right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child. The views of the child should be given appropriate weight in line with the age and the maturity of the child. The ACRWC under Article 4(2) provides that ‘in all judicial or administrative proceedings affecting a child who is capable of communicating his or her own views, an opportunity shall be provided for the views to be heard.’ In respect of this right the ACRWC takes a restrictive approach by employing the phrase ‘a child who is capable of communicating his or her own views’ as opposed to the CRC which uses the phrase ‘a child who is capable of forming his or her views.’59 According to the Committee on the Rights of the Child in General Comment No.12, the right to be heard or participation of a child in all matters affecting him or her should not only be a ‘momentary act’, but the starting point of an elaborate exchange between children and adults on the development of policies, programmes and measures in all relevant contexts of lives of children.60 Both the CRC and the ACRWC do not impose an age limit on the right of a child to express his or her views,61 thus even in migration context, states should not impose an age limit for children to express their views. Specifically, states have an obligation to ensure the implementation of the right to participation for children experiencing difficulties in expressing their views. For instance according to General Comment No.12, states must put in place measures to recognize the right to expression of views for minority and migrant children who do not speak the language of the majority.62 In addition, states have an obligation to take adequate measures to ensure that every child freely expresses 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 Joint General Comment No. 3 (n 30 above) Para 43. Joint General Comment No. 3 (n 30 above) Para 44. As above. BD Mezmur, The African Children’s Charter versus the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Zero-Sum Game? (2008) 23. CRC, General Comment No. 12 (2009) The right of the child to be heard CRC/C/GC/12 para 13. As above. General Comment No. 14 (n 41 bove) Para 21. 24