Webinar: "Decolonising Children’s Rights: An Afrocentric Perspective"

Date: 10 February 2026
Time: 13:00-15:00
Venue: Zoom

On 10 February 2026, 160 participants from across the world joined the CREAN & NTNU webinar, organised in collaboration with its member institution Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), to explore alternative ways of understanding and implementing children’s rights. The session used Barreto’s three-folded decolonial framework to challenge Eurocentric assumptions in the UNCRC. It also explored locally rooted concepts and encourage dialogue across perspectives. Drawing on the Buganda worldview of Obuntubulamu and selected proverbs, participants critically examined children’s rights and gained insights into relational and holistic approaches to well-being and culturally sensitive practices. The programme featured expert presentations, a panel debate, and a Q&A session. 

Key takeaway: Children’s rights should not be understood as a choice between universal norms or cultural practices. Rather, meaningful protection emerges when international frameworks and customary knowledge (such as proverbs, community practices and relational care systems) mutually inform one another.

Insights from the conversation:

  1. Decolonisation is not abandonment of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The UNCRC formalised children’s rights, but did not create them; many concepts of children as rights-holders pre-existed in different societies, highlighted in this webinar through an Afrocentric perspective, and continue to exist alongside international law.
  2. Universality needs dialogue, not hierarchy. Human rights frameworks developed largely within European historical contexts may not fully reflect diverse childhoods; therefore, universality may need to be re-envisioned as a plural and relational concept.
  3. Local knowledge matters. African philosophies such as Ubuntu/Obuntubulamu and oral traditions (e.g., proverbs) illustrate participation, care, community responsibility and interdependence in children’s lives. Yet these sources often face epistemological discrimination, because they are rooted in oral traditions that do not readily fit Eurocentric academic publication and referencing practices.
  4. Rights and responsibilities must be balanced. The African Charter explicitly recognises children’s responsibilities toward family and community, while similar expectations often exist implicitly elsewhere; their limited recognition in the UNCRC can create tensions, particularly in child protection practice.
  5. Tradition is complex. Customary practices can both support and restrict children’s rights. For example, some proverbs encourage participation of children to the community and intergenerational learning, while others may silence children. This reminds us of the importance of critically engaging with both formal and customary systems and of strengthening dialogue between them to better realise children’s rights.

For more information, please see the concept note and the programme.