Prohibition by Taliban on education of girls departed from International law
The international law obligation under Article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 (CRC) requires States Parties to “Make primary education compulsory and available free to all”. The same Article also obliges States Parties to make secondary and higher education accessible to all, reported Global Watch.
Taliban could present two arguments in defence of its move against the free accessibility to girls’ education. First, the Taliban regime being an unrecognized State, could argue that it is not bound by any international treaties/conventions that previous regimes of Afghanistan have acceded to.
However, international law is not a basket from which a State can pick and choose.
Such an argument would also imply that the Taliban regime will not benefit from any norms of international law such as those governing the conduct of diplomatic relations.
According to a second argument, the Taliban could say that the Islamic State of Afghanistan was in a peculiar position at the time it ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1994. It could say that as it was engaged in a civil war with varying levels of control over the country and the Taliban eventually came to power in 1996.
The Taliban regime, which titles itself the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, cannot then be considered to be a successor of the Islamic State of Afghanistan, neither between 1996-2001 nor after 2021. If so, the Taliban regime has no locus standi to demand the release of Afghanistan’s frozen foreign reserves, said Global Watch.