The Crisis in the DRC and its Impact on Children: Legal Protection vs Effective Protection

By Sabrina Odia

August 15, 2026

The Democratic Republic of the Congo has endured decades of armed conflict, displacement and instability. Yet, the situation in eastern Congo has entered another deeply concerning phase. Fighting involving the AFC/M23 and other armed groups, alongside Congolese forces and their allies, has intensified the humanitarian crisis in North Kivu, South Kivu and Ituri. The escalation has displaced millions of people and placed civilians, particularly children, at extraordinary risk. The United Nations has documented persistent violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, including killings, sexual violence, abductions, forced displacement and the recruitment and use of children.

The scale of the humanitarian need is difficult to comprehend. UNICEF estimates that 14.9 million people, including approximately 8 million children, will require humanitarian assistance in the DRC in 2026. More than 5.3 million people are internally displaced, including around 4 million children. In the eastern provinces, continued violence has disrupted access to healthcare, education, nutrition, clean water and basic protection services.

However, statistics can sometimes conceal what the crisis actually means for a child.

For a child, displacement can mean leaving home without knowing whether they will return. It can mean separation from parents, the loss of a school, interrupted education, exposure to violence, hunger or disease, and living in an environment where the structures normally responsible for their protection are themselves overwhelmed. Children are not simply incidental victims of this conflict. They are being subjected to specific and serious violations.

The United Nations verified 4,114 grave violations against 3,263 children in the DRC during 2025. These included the recruitment and use of 1,397 children, the killing and maiming of 918 children, sexual violence against 592 children, the abduction of 1,067 children and attacks on 121 schools and hospitals. The UN has also stressed that these figures do not represent the full extent of violations, because insecurity and restrictions on access make verification extremely difficult.

These are not merely humanitarian concerns. They engage established protections under international law.

International humanitarian law provides children affected by armed conflict with special protection. Children must not be recruited or used in hostilities, and parties to conflict have obligations to protect civilians and civilian objects. International human rights law continues to apply during armed conflict, while the Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict reinforce the obligation to protect children from exploitation, violence and recruitment. The legal framework, therefore, is not absent. The more difficult question is whether it is reaching the child on the ground.

Where children are falling through the cracks

One of the clearest protection gaps is the distance between legal recognition and practical protection.

A child may have a legal right to protection from recruitment, but that protection becomes far more difficult to realise when a community has been displaced, humanitarian access is restricted and armed groups continue to operate. A child may have a right to education, but that right becomes fragile when schools are attacked, closed or inaccessible because of insecurity. UNICEF estimates that 3.9 million people in the DRC require humanitarian education support, while nationwide millions of children remain out of school.

A child separated from their family may have a right to protection and family reunification, but finding and supporting that child becomes considerably more difficult when families are repeatedly displaced. And a child who has been recruited by an armed group requires more than release. They need identification, safe separation, psychosocial support, education, family tracing and reunification where possible, and sustainable reintegration into their communities. This is where the crisis becomes more than a question of whether international law exists. It becomes a question of capacity, implementation and access.

The international community has mechanisms for monitoring grave violations against children. The DRC has also taken steps in the past to strengthen its legal and institutional framework against child recruitment. Humanitarian organisations and UN agencies continue to provide protection, education, health and psychosocial services. But the scale of need continues to exceed the capacity available.

As of 31 August 2025, direct threats and attacks by armed actors had forced the closure of more than 5,200 schools, depriving nearly 1.9 million children of access to learning.

What can be done?

There is no single intervention capable of resolving a crisis of this magnitude. As my advocacy always emphasises, protecting children requires action across several levels. And all hands must be on deck.

First, child protection must remain central to diplomatic and peace processes. 

Commitments made around ceasefires and peace agreements should include concrete, measurable protections for children, with mechanisms to monitor implementation. 

Second, humanitarian access must be protected. 

Humanitarian organisations cannot protect children they cannot reach. Safe, rapid and sustained access to affected communities is essential for delivering food, healthcare, education, psychosocial support and child-protection services. The UN has repeatedly called on parties to facilitate such access.

Third, prevention and response to child recruitment must be strengthened. 

Children associated with armed groups should be treated primarily as children requiring protection and rehabilitation. Release must be followed by meaningful reintegration, rather than simply removing a child from an armed group and leaving them without support.

Fourth, education must be treated as part of the protection response. 

Keeping children learning during conflict provides continuity, stability and a protective environment. Investment in safe schools and alternative learning opportunities is therefore not simply an educational intervention; it is a child-protection measure.

Finally, accountability must remain part of the response. 

Serious violations against children must be documented, investigated and, where the applicable legal elements are met, prosecuted. International humanitarian law and international human rights law cannot become abstract principles disconnected from the consequences faced by children.

The crisis in the DRC is complex. It cannot be reduced to one armed group, one political decision or one failed institution. Nor can the suffering of children be measured only by the number of violations that can be verified. Behind every figure is a child whose education has been interrupted, whose family may have been separated, whose home may have been destroyed, or whose future has been placed on hold by a conflict they did not create.

The DRC demonstrates an uncomfortable reality of international child protection: having legal protections is not the same as having effective protection.

The challenge is to close that distance. 

For the children of the Congo, international law must be more than a framework that exists in treaties, resolutions and reports. It must translate into functioning institutions, accessible services, protected schools, humanitarian access, accountability and communities capable of keeping children safe.

The question is not whether the world knows that children in the DRC are suffering. The question is whether we are prepared to build the systems capable of protecting them.

---

Disclaimer:

This website is a platform for independent legal research, analysis, and commentary concerning international law, international human rights law, children's rights, treaties, and related legal frameworks.

The analysis presented on this website is grounded in existing international legal instruments, treaties, jurisprudence, legal principles, and other authoritative legal sources. It examines the law as it exists, including its interpretation, application, implementation, obligations, limitations, and areas in which legal or institutional frameworks may be strengthened. Any discussion of possible approaches or recommendations is considered from a legal and policy implementation perspective and is grounded in the existing legal framework.

This website does not provide political analysis, political commentary, or political opinion. No political position, partisan view, or political advocacy is expressed or intended. References to states, governments, institutions, conflicts, or international events are made only where relevant to the legal issues being examined.

The material published on this website is provided for educational, research, and informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice concerning any individual person, case, dispute, or specific legal matter, and nothing published on this website creates a lawyer-client relationship.

The content reflects an independent examination of existing legal frameworks and is intended to contribute to informed understanding and discussion of international law and human rights.