n February 5, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child issued its concluding observations on Pakistan’s sixth and seventh periodic reports under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The review, held on January 15 and 16 in Geneva, brought together a senior Pakistani delegation that included the state minister for law and justice, the federal secretary for human rights and senior provincial leaders. The level of representation reflected a clear willingness to engage with international scrutiny.

The significance of the review will ultimately be measured not in Geneva, but in what follows in Pakistani institutions.

Pakistan is no longer short of laws and policy commitments relating to children’s rights. Over the past decade, legislation has expanded, institutions have evolved and successive governments have endorsed commitments at regional and global platforms aimed at strengthening child protection. The committee acknowledged several areas of progress. Yet many of the same concerns continue to reappear across reporting cycles, suggesting that the central challenge lies not in recognising priorities but in sustaining implementation after the commitments are made.

International treaty reviews often follow a familiar rhythm. Reports are prepared, a dialogue takes place, recommendations are issued and commitments are reaffirmed. Once the process ends, responsibility spreads across ministries and provincial departments without a structured system to monitor progress or ensure follow-through.

Pakistan’s devolved governance framework makes this challenge more visible. The provinces carry the primary responsibility for legislation, services and enforcement, while treaty obligations remain national commitments. Without a mechanism linking these two levels, progress becomes uneven and accountability diffuse.

The committee’s observations, therefore, point to a governance problem rather than isolated sectoral failures. Implementation still depends too heavily on short-term institutional momentum rather than systems designed to sustain progress over time.

Beyond child rights, the repetition of recommendations reflects a broader governance challenge. When commitments are revisited every reporting cycle without sustained follow-up, institutional learning is lost and policy continuity weakens. Implementation mechanisms are, therefore, not only about treaty compliance but also about strengthening administrative coherence and long-term public sector effectiveness.

Certain harmful practices illustrate this gap clearly. Child marriage remains the most visible example. Recent developments show renewed political attention. The promulgation of a child marriage ordinance in the Punjab represents an important legislative step and signals growing recognition of the need for stronger protections.

Yet legislation alone does not ensure protection. The committee continues to raise concerns about enforcement, reporting, investigation and victim support mechanisms across the country. Legal reform in one province does not automatically translate into consistent safeguards nationwide. Differences in capacity, implementation practices and institutional coordination continue to produce uneven outcomes.

This pattern highlights a recurring governance challenge. Progress is often measured through new laws; systems to track whether those laws are consistently enforced receive far less attention. Without sustained monitoring and support, reforms risk remaining symbolic achievements rather than lasting change.

A similar dynamic appears in efforts to address violence against children, including child abuse. The issue has received sustained national attention, prompting legislative reforms, institutional initiatives and increased public awareness. Important steps have been taken by government agencies and child protection institutions to strengthen responses.

Despite these efforts, the committee continues to express concern about prevention systems, reporting pathways, investigations and access to child-centred services. The persistence of these concerns does not reflect indifference; it reflects fragmentation.

Preventing violence against children requires coordination among policing systems, child protection authorities, commissions and specialised institutions, alongside social welfare departments, education authorities, health services and courts. When coordination mechanisms are weak, responsibility becomes scattered and progress uneven. Improvements achieved in individual institutions struggle to translate into systemic change.

Reflecting its general comment on violence against children, the Committee called for a nationwide prevention strategy, child-friendly reporting mechanisms and stronger local child protection infrastructure capable of responding consistently to abuse and exploitation. These recommendations underscore that effective protection depends not only on legal provisions, but on coordinated systems that enable early reporting, timely investigation and child-centred responses across institutions.

Both harmful practices and violence against children, therefore, reveal the same underlying issue. Pakistan does not lack recognition of the problem; it lacks a system capable of sustaining implementation across sectors and provinces.

The committee also drew attention to emerging areas such as child and adolescent mental health and access to age-appropriate information and services supporting adolescent health and wellbeing. Recommendations calling for expanded counselling services, trained social workers and comprehensive policy frameworks reflect changing risks faced by children in a rapidly evolving social environment.

Pakistan’s devolved governance framework makes this challenge more visible. Provinces carry the primary responsibility for legislation, services and enforcement, while treaty obligations remain national commitments.

The growing convergence of these priorities among policymakers and international partners highlights a common reality: commitments alone are not enough without systems capable of translating policy intentions into services that reach children consistently across all provinces.

The Committee recommended a standing national mechanism for reporting and follow-up to address this structural gap. Such a mechanism should not be understood as another reporting requirement. Its purpose would be to ensure continuity between commitment and action.

In practice, such a mechanism could function through quarterly provincial progress reviews supported by a shared national dashboard tracking key child protection indicators, drawing on digital monitoring approaches already used in initiatives such as the Pakistan Citizens’s Portal. This would allow gaps to be identified early, technical support to be directed where needed and progress to be assessed continuously rather than only during reporting cycles.

A credible framework will require provincial governments to provide regular updates on measurable progress aligned with treaty obligations. These updates should focus on outcomes rather than activities and feed into a national monitoring system capable of identifying disparities and implementation bottlenecks. A structured follow-up system will also enable development partners to align technical assistance with identified implementation gaps rather than fragmented project-based interventions.

Equally important, the mechanism will allow corrective action when progress stalls. Identifying whether challenges arise from legislation, resources, coordination or capacity enables targeted solutions rather than repeated commitments.

Coordination in this context strengthens federalism rather than weakening it. Provinces face different realities and require differentiated support. Structured follow-up provides coherence while respecting autonomy.

Institutional placement will be critical. Treaty implementation and inter-governmental coordination are executive responsibilities requiring authority to convene ministries and engage provincial governments. Operational leadership should, therefore, rest within the federal executive - anchored in the Ministry of Human Rights. Importantly, such a mechanism will build on existing institutional arrangements rather than creating an entirely new structure, making reform administratively feasible.

Periodic discussion of child rights implementation at the Council of Common Interests could reinforce federal-provincial coordination and political ownership, complementing the technical leadership of the Ministry of Human Rights.

At the same time, independent oversight must be strengthened. The Committee has recommended that Pakistan amend its legislation to ensure full independence of the National Commission on the Rights of the Child. A stronger and more autonomous commission will be better positioned to assess implementation, analyse systemic gaps and evaluate state responses against legal obligations. Its role should complement, not replace, executive coordination.

Parliamentary engagement will also be essential to sustain implementation beyond reporting cycles. Regular briefings to relevant parliamentary committees at federal and provincial levels can enable elected representatives to review progress, identify legislative gaps and ensure that child rights commitments remain part of ongoing policy oversight rather than episodic international reporting exercises.

Transparency can further reinforce accountability. A public-facing monitoring dashboard will allow parliamentarians, civil society and the media to track progress over time, transforming reporting from a procedural exercise into a driver of reform.

The Geneva dialogue demonstrated Pakistan’s willingness to engage internationally. The concluding observations offer direction. Whether this review marks another cycle of repetition or a turning point will depend on the systems built at home.

Without sustained follow-up, reporting risks becoming an end in itself. With it, Pakistan has an opportunity to translate commitments into measurable progress for children.

Engagement has opened the conversation; implementation will determine whether that engagement leads to lasting change.

The writer, the executive director of Search for Justice, has over 18 years of experience in human rights and child rights policy, governance and institutional reform. He can be reached at [email protected]