The coalition agreement includes numerous measures concerning the rights and well-being of children in our projects. This article presents the new federal government's plans in the areas of development cooperation, child labor in supply chains, and the protection of refugee children.
The plans outlined in the coalition agreement still need to be implemented, but one thing is already clear: it is not a manifesto for children's rights. We will therefore work even harder in all relevant policy areas to ensure that children's rights are protected.
Our concrete help worldwide is more important than ever right now, so that children are protected and given a fair start in life. Thank you to everyone who supports us with their donations and commitment!
Development cooperation and humanitarian aid
The good news first: The Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development will remain in place, meaning Germany's global responsibility will continue to have a voice at the cabinet table. The new federal government also promises to strengthen humanitarian aid. Furthermore, it intends to continue implementing development projects in close partnership with local civil society organizations to respond flexibly and quickly to emergencies and development challenges close to the people they serve. This is particularly important for Terre des Hommes , as we are committed to working exclusively with local partners.
The bad news: The coalition agreement threatens massive cuts in development aid. At a time when other donor countries like the USA are withdrawing and millions of lives are at risk, there is a danger that Germany, too, will provide less support for children worldwide. Furthermore, development aid is intended to primarily serve German interests in the future, thus risking the neglect of children's protection and their rights.
Now more than ever, it is crucial that we stand up for children and their rights. We do this through our projects for children worldwide and with our expertise in children's rights. We will advocate even more strongly than before for robust development cooperation that prioritizes children and their rights over national self-interest and ensures that partner organizations in the Global South are strengthened and supported.
The coalition agreement stipulates a "reasonable reduction in the ODA ratio." The ODA ratio (Official Development Assistance) refers to the share of gross national income that a country allocates to official development assistance.
This makes it unclear how much money will actually be available in the future for the core areas of development cooperation, especially for fragile and particularly underdeveloped states and vulnerable population groups such as children, whose “benefit” to national interests is not immediately apparent.
The successful management of current and future challenges in the present partner countries of development cooperation depends crucially on whether it is possible to open up prospects for young people, such as educational opportunities and social participation, because they constitute the majority of the population there. Naturally, children also benefit when the German government continues its commitment to education, health, poverty and hunger reduction, the promotion of women's rights (including girls' rights), and the strengthening of civil society.
Conceptually, but also practically, the coalition agreement offers little guidance on how this new orientation towards self-interest is to be achieved and how, in particular, the multiple crises of the present, in which, for example, poverty, armed conflicts and climate change have a particularly fatal effect on children, can be addressed in a meaningful and sustainable way.
It is not inherently wrong for the German government to represent its own interests in international cooperation. The government should communicate its positions openly and pragmatically to the public. However, the use of the term "interest" must provide guidance and not serve merely rhetorical purposes. Many development cooperation issues also touch upon the very interests of the German population. This applies, for example, to safeguarding global goods such as health, including the containment of pandemics, as well as to securing peace, democracy, and human rights.
Furthermore, development policy and humanitarian challenges affecting children are difficult to reconcile with a narrow definition of self-interest. It is therefore both logical and regrettable that children's rights are not among the priorities of international policy mentioned in the coalition agreement. Development policy and humanitarian aid are guided by long-term goals and principles, often developed in international forums. Subordinating them to other policy areas can lead to conflicts of interest. In this respect, the guiding principle in the coalition agreement that development policy is "both value- and interest-driven" also requires clarification.
Whether the commitment to democracy, the rule of law, and human rights "goes hand in hand" with foreign, security, and economic policy interests, as the coalition partners put it, depends on whether and how these interests are conceived and implemented in an integrated manner. For example, securing raw materials in partnership with countries of the Global South only makes sense from a development policy perspective if it simultaneously protects the climate, safeguards children from exploitation, and serves to maintain peace.
The coalition agreement promises to strengthen humanitarian aid, which is to be ensured through "adequate" funding, and the German government intends—a positive step—to examine whether it can compensate for the shortfall in other donor countries. However, it remains unclear how this statement relates to the intention to reduce the ODA ratio. Cuts at the expense of development cooperation would send the wrong signal, as humanitarian aid cannot be the sole answer to the increasing number of crises in the world.
The continued focus on civil society within German development cooperation is also a positive development, encompassing both the funding of non-state actors in the Global South and those within Germany. Civil society can react quickly in emergencies, provide unbureaucratic assistance, and is closer to the local population. It steps in where state actors fail and strengthens democracy. However, given the previous government's planned cuts to funding for private organizations, it remains to be seen whether this political commitment to civil society-based development cooperation will translate into concrete measures in the future budget.
Child labor in supply chains
The coalition agreement provides for the abolition of the national supply chain law (LkSG). This is intended to reduce bureaucracy. It will be replaced by a "Law on International Corporate Responsibility," which will implement the existing European Supply Chain Directive (CSDDD).
This threatens significant setbacks in child and environmental protection within the supply chains of German companies. Consumption without child labor becomes a distant prospect. Companies operating sustainably and fairly face competitive disadvantages.
Together with our partners, we will advocate for strong legislation to implement the European Supply Chain Directive. Furthermore, we will continue to stand by working children through our projects and will bring violations of children's rights along global supply chains to the public and policymakers as soon as we become aware of them.
Procedurally, the announced abolition of the Supply Chain Act cannot be achieved through the adoption of a coalition agreement, but requires a resolution by the Bundestag (German Federal Parliament). Therefore, the decision regarding the future of the Supply Chain Act is still pending. At the same time, the coalition agreement announces its replacement by a law on international corporate responsibility to implement the European Supply Chain Directive (CSDD).
This step was planned even before the coalition agreement was adopted and represents an opportunity to continue holding companies accountable, including through German legislation implementing the CSDD. It is particularly important to us that the law includes comprehensive regulations to protect children and young people from exploitation and violence in global supply chains and provides for their participation.
The coalition agreement proposes the immediate and complete abolition of the reporting obligation under the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act. This means companies will no longer be required to report on human rights and environmental risks and measures within their supply chains. This significantly weakens the effectiveness of the national supply chain law. Without transparency, compliance with due diligence obligations will be difficult to verify. Furthermore, this contradicts the assessment of many companies that have established effective reporting systems and see not only improved protection of children's and human rights but also efficiency gains in their operations ( see the HRI study ).
Existing sanctions will be suspended, with the exception of “massive human rights violations,” until the CSDDD Directive enters into force. However, it is entirely unclear what this term is supposed to mean, as any form of child and human rights violation is unacceptable. It is also unclear how exactly the suspension of sanctions will be implemented, since they are currently enshrined in law and valid. Furthermore, this sanction-free transition period primarily endangers those who advocate for the realization of children's and human rights and effectively grants corporations carte blanche.
In principle, there is nothing wrong with a streamlined and enforcement-friendly implementation of the CSDDD, as envisaged in the coalition agreement, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. However, this must not be at the expense of children and the environment. Therefore, there must be, among other things, civil liability for damages and legal violations resulting from breaches of the CSDDD. These breaches often constitute serious violations of children's rights, for which responsibility must be assumed.
The Supply Chain Act, in its current form, still protects children along global supply chains from exploitation – any changes require a decision by the Bundestag (German Federal Parliament). We therefore urge the members of the Bundestag not to support the approach planned in the coalition agreement in its current form. Furthermore, together with our civil society partners and supporting businesses, we will advocate for a strong law to implement the European Supply Chain Directive and monitor its implementation. It is crucial that children are effectively protected from exploitation, that they can report violations in a safe environment, and that companies can be held liable for violations.
Protection of refugee children
The coalition agreement envisages significant tightening of regulations in the areas of migration and integration. The list of measures, which will also severely impact refugee children and young people, is long: Reception programs are to be almost entirely discontinued, and family reunification is to be further restricted. Turnbacks at the borders, the massive expansion of deportations, and the curtailment of procedural and benefit rights jeopardize the well-being and rights of refugee children and young people.
For us, one thing is clear: We stand firmly by the side of refugee children and young people, especially now. We will not tire of raising our voices to the public and politicians to ensure their rights are protected. Together with our partner organizations, we also provide assistance in emergency situations, offer legal support, and advocate for the protection of refugee children and young people from violence and for their participation in society.
The coalition agreement proposes suspending family reunification for those granted subsidiary protection for two years. This means more children will have to grow up separated from their parents or siblings, significantly hindering integration, and creating another factor that forces people onto life-threatening escape routes because they have no other way to reach their families. Separation from their families is particularly traumatic for children and can have devastating effects on their health and development.
According to the coalition agreement, voluntary admission programs are to be discontinued "as far as possible." If this actually applies to all existing admission programs, it would mean the end of some of the few remaining legal pathways to Germany. This also affects the life-saving "Federal Admission Program for Afghanistan." The new government's plans hit those most vulnerable, such as women and children, especially hard. For them, the targeted humanitarian admission program, which is now to be abolished, is often the only way to find safety.
"In coordination with our European neighbors," Germany plans to push back asylum seekers at its borders. Blanket rejections would also affect children and families and would be, above all, unlawful. According to the currently applicable Dublin III Regulation, in the case of an asylum application, it must first be determined which member state is responsible, followed by a formal asylum procedure. Unaccompanied minors constitute a particularly vulnerable group and must be immediately placed in the care of the youth welfare office upon crossing the border.
Together with our partner organizations, we have long observed at the European external borders that rejections and pushbacks are accompanied by violence for those affected. Furthermore, a state of emergency as defined in Article 72 TFEU is clearly not present in Germany.
The announcement of a so-called "return offensive" is already causing fear among refugee children and their families, hindering their arrival and integration. This article illustrates, for example, what the increasingly harsh deportation practices, which also affect families and children, mean in individual cases.
Increased detention and pre-deportation custody, which, according to the coalition agreement, are also to be requested by the Federal Police, will lead to more children being separated from their parents. We say: Children themselves must never be taken into deportation custody and must, in principle, be exempt from deportation.
Furthermore, the coalition agreement stipulates that deportations to Afghanistan and Syria will resume – two countries where serious human rights violations are a threat. The designation of countries like Morocco, Algeria, or Tunisia as safe countries of origin ignores the human rights situation in these countries.
Children and their families could also be affected by rejections and deportations based on this assessment, without having received a fair trial.
The "principle of official investigation" in asylum law is to be replaced by the "principle of presentation of evidence." This simple sentence in the coalition agreement has the potential to fundamentally and massively weaken procedural guarantees for refugees in general—and thus also for children and their families. See, for example, PRO ASYL or Prof. Dr. Winfried Kluth for more details.
The cryptic sentence "We will ensure the consistent implementation of existing restrictions on entitlements in benefit law" means in practice the implementation of the benefit cuts, which are also highly critical for children and young people, including those from the so-called security package or in the form of the payment card.
Ukrainian refugees will in future receive benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act. Besides an enormous increase in bureaucracy, this will mean, among other things, fewer benefits and limited medical care for children and their parents.
The term "irregular migration" falsely suggests that there are sufficient legal pathways for refugees to seek protection. Unfortunately, such legal pathways, for example via a visa, are virtually nonexistent. Instead, refugees are forced to enter the country via dangerous routes in order to even be able to submit an asylum application (see, for example, PRO ASYL 2023).
The coalition agreement now severely restricts or completely suspends some of the few remaining safe routes to Germany. Instead of limiting "irregular migration," the few existing legal escape routes are being restricted. Experience shows that when legal pathways are lacking, irregular migration increases and escape routes become more dangerous. The consequence: more children and young people die while fleeing.
The coalition agreement aims to increase equal opportunities for children through massive investments in daycare centers and schools. Migration counselling for adult immigrants is to be continued and adequately funded; investments are to be made in integration, integration courses are to be continued, language-focused daycare centers are to be introduced, and the "Start-Chances" program is to be continued and expanded to include daycare centers. A commitment to the important role of civil society organizations as a "bridge" during the integration process is mentioned – how this will be financed remains to be seen.