Credit: Pixabay
On Monday 16 March 2026, Amnesty International Luxembourg released a statement, together with several other organisations, about how cases of violence against children are handled by the justice system in Luxembourg.
As the Ombudsman fir Kanner a Jugendlecher (OKAJU) and Innocence en Danger (IED) have noted in their annual reports, Luxembourg is not immune to violence against children. Amnesty International Luxembourg, IED, L'Effrontée and Passerell have joined forces to warn about the way such cases are treated by the justice system, particularly in relation to sexual violence.
In any proceedings concerning a minor, a fundamental principle must guide judicial decisions: the best interests of the child, the organisations stressed. This principle is enshrined in the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child and in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. This principle requires, above all, the protection of children against all forms of violence.
The organisations argued that many legal proceedings related to sexual violence against minors in Luxembourg appear to disregard the best interests of the child. Although there are no national statistics or data on these acts of violence and their consequences, information gathered by grassroots organisations is described as "alarming". In many cases, the child's testimony is not taken into account and sometimes not even heard, they argued. When a child reports sexual violence, the justice system faces a major responsibility: not to ignore a potential danger.
The organisations also called into question the effectiveness of legal representation and the speed of the justice system. They argued that judicial proceedings may drag on for years, a delay they said was incompatible with a child's development. By the time victims are finally heard, memories may have faded or become less vivid. The organisations added that children's testimonies are sometimes discredited because the child is unable to accurately quantify the number of assaults suffered. However, this inability to provide an exact figure can be a documented consequence of trauma. The organisations argued that this dismissal of children's testimonies reflects a lack of training among legal professionals regarding the psychological effects of trauma, adding that fuzzy memories should be interpreted as an indicator of the violence suffered rather than a means of dismissing the child's testimony.
The statement also noted that children may struggle to understand their rights in a complex justice system and are often unaware of the role of a lawyer. This is exacerbated by a lack of institutional dialogue. According to the organisations, there are very few discussions between the various associations and institutions, which only rarely respond to requests from child protection organisations, which the organisations said hinders attempts at collaborative work.
In addition, reports from the field indicate that children who have reported sexual abuse by a parent, with supporting medical evidence, have been placed with the accused parent, or in foster care or group homes, away from the protective parent. The organisations referred to Article 9 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which stipulates that children should be separated from a parent in cases of abuse. Article 19 also emphasises the responsibility of States Parties to take all necessary measures to protect children from all forms of violence.
The organisations also argued that reports from healthcare professionals and specialised organisations are sometimes ignored. However, when doubt exists, the child's safety must take precedence, they emphasised.
The organisations concluded that, throughout legal proceedings, the best interests of the child are too often not the priority in cases of violence against minors. While addressing the root causes of violence against children is essential, they stressed that it is equally important to ensure that Luxembourg's justice system prioritises the well-being of minors.
