Filenews 28 December 2025 - by Evangelia Sizopoulou
"I'm not talking about the children. I convey with full consciousness of responsibility, what they themselves experience, formulate and claim. I am on duty by the side of the children. I am their institutional defender and their voice against the State"!
The above are just some of what the new Commissioner for the Protection of Children's Rights told us in this conversation. Elena Pericleous has been in this position since last October and went into the deep end immediately. Not because it has to, but because it wants to contribute to the strengthening of mechanisms and institutions for the protection of children, to the defense of their rights, to the horizons that must be opened for them, and not only in theory but also in practice. As an educator and writer, with several children's books to her credit, but also with her approach, she immediately gives the stigma of her love and interest for children. And for these, she is ready to work from the position of their own Commissioner.
Mrs. Pericleous speaks today to "F", shares her own plan and goals for the interest of the Child and does not hesitate to take a position on the incident that recently saw the light of day regarding the accommodation of a child in a Shelter, which is under the responsibility of the state.
-As the new Commissioner for the Protection of Children's Rights, what are the priorities and challenges ahead of you?
-If I were to speak in terms that are not strictly institutional but human, I would say that the role of the Commissioner is not just a legal mission. It is a position of responsibility with moral weight. It's about how you stand towards the children, not only when something goes wrong, but above all so that we don't get there.
The Commissioner's Office must first of all listen. To be a place where every child, every parent, every professional knows that their voice will be recorded, examined and not lost in drawers. That is why I place special emphasis on the way we handle complaints and petitions: Not just as administrative cases, but as real stories that require a clear course, transparency and response.
At the same time, I deeply believe that we cannot protect children's rights if we do not see the big picture. The data are not cold numbers, they are traces of problems that come back, policies that do not work, gaps that persist. I want the Office to work with knowledge: To know which rights are systematically violated, which children are left exposed, where intervention is needed. And this knowledge should be turned into documented, targeted suggestions to the state — not general findings, but proposals that close "grey areas" and strengthen the safety net, especially for the most vulnerable children.
Central to my philosophy is the participation of the children themselves. Not as a decorative element, not to say that we "asked them", but as meaningful interlocutors. The bet is to be able to give them a real role: To be heard, to influence, to give feedback to our work. We are looking at ways to open up this participation more: Through the creation of a network of schools, through safe consultation platforms, through the cultivation of critical thinking. The voice of children has value when it is not guided, when it is not manipulated, when it is received with respect.
Another pillar is education and awareness. Not with general messages to "the whole of society", but with targeted work. Children have different needs, teachers have others, parents, judges, journalists or those who work in detention facilities have other needs. The Office must be able — when properly staffed — to speak the language of each team and to enhance knowledge and skills where it is really needed.
And, finally, there is something that I consider crucial: Efficiency. It is not enough to identify problems or make suggestions. The point is to see changes in practice — in policies, in procedures, in services that affect children's lives every day. To be able to say, honestly, that something has improved because we claimed it.
This is the way I perceive my role. Less as a position, more as a responsibility. A responsibility to turn children's voices, data, and needs into actions that have meaning and duration.
-What is it that you want to change and what to give your own mark on, in terms of the issues that fall under your portfolio?
-If I had to sum it up in one sentence, I would say that I want to change the way we listen to children and the way we react when they talk to us.
My mark is not to reinvent the institution, but to make it more vibrant, more accessible, and more effective for those it serves. I want the Commissioner's Office to function less as a distant institution and more as a stable, reliable interlocutor for children and those who care for them.
This means, first of all, moving from good intention to systematic action. From general declarations to specific procedures. From recording issues to using data that reveals patterns, gaps, and responsibilities and leads to targeted policy changes.
I want to give real content to the participation of children. Children are not "tomorrow's citizens", they are today's citizens, and they have the right to speak in what concerns them.
We will focus in the Office on an approach that combines institutional seriousness with human proximity. Who is not afraid to control, to clash where necessary, but also to cooperate. Which measures success not with announcements, but with tangible changes in the daily lives of children, especially the most vulnerable.
Simply put, we want the institution not just to be present, but to make a difference — and for that difference to be seen.
-Recently, an incident had seen the light of day in which a child was found outside his accommodation structure, appealing to be opened to enter. Have you investigated the incident? And if so, what are the facts that were put before you.
-The incident was indeed brought before my Office and was treated with the seriousness required by its nature. When a child is outside the structure that has the responsibility of caring for and protecting him/her, this in itself raises serious questions, regardless of the individual circumstances.
The Office has requested and is examining all relevant data from the competent services: The procedures applied in the specific structure, the time of the child's management on that day, as well as the protocols followed in similar cases. At the same time, it is assessed whether the practices applied were compatible with the best interests of the child and with the obligations arising from the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
I want to be clear about something: Even if operational difficulties are projected, which are given and undeniable, the image of a child being excluded from his place of residence is something that deeply concerns us. Children in care structures are not there by choice; They are there because the state has assumed their responsibility.
At this stage, it would not be appropriate to make public details that could lead to the identification of the child or affect the examination process. What I can say is that the incident is not treated as an isolated snapshot, but as an occasion to examine more comprehensively the practices, protocols and endurance limits of the care system.
The aim is not to attribute responsibility for the impressions, but to find out whether there have been gaps and — above all — to ensure that no child finds themselves in a similar position again.
-On the occasion of this incident, there is often a lot of discussion about the state structures in which children are accommodated. What is your position and actions?
-As Commissioner for the Protection of Children's Rights, I see the operation of state structures not as a simple administrative act, but as a direct impact on the rights, safety and dignity of children. Our mission is to ensure that the policies and practices implemented within these structures meet the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and how they are implemented in practice.
On the occasion of the recent incident, I visited the structure to immediately find out what happened, requested a full and official report from the competent services and we identified evidence that shows room for improvement in the existing protocols, in order to rule out similar situations in the future.
For us, every child in care should feel safe and have access to an environment that fully respects their rights. Our work doesn't stop at recording incidents — we aim to systematically monitor, strengthen processes, and promote changes that will have a tangible and measurable impact on children's daily lives.
We remind you that the role of structures is not to "host" but to protect and empower.
The Office's mission includes monitoring practices and policies applied to children in care in order to determine whether their rights are guaranteed
On the occasion of this incident and more generally, the actions I am promoting move on three levels:
A. Immediate supervision and investigation of practices
I ask for data/explanations from the competent services on the operating protocols, risk management and the way they are implemented in practice.
I check if the procedures are child-centered and if they prevent "grey areas" that leave a child exposed.
B. Strengthening of grievance and protection mechanisms within the structures
I seek to have clear response times, follow-up of each case until the outcome, and transparency as to "what happened next".
I enhance children's accessibility to the available communication/support channels.
C. Reform with measurable objectives
I prioritize upgrading quality standards (staffing, training, surveillance, safeguarding) and evaluation with indicators.
I promote collaborations/suggestions so that decisions are based on evidence and lead to structural changes—because without "structural changes" rights remain wishes.
A meeting has already taken place with the SWS. A substantial meeting, in order to lead to real and substantive solutions. As characteristically mentioned at the meeting by the Director of the SWS, with whom I completely agree, solutions on the ground.
The nightmare of sexual abuse: Breaking the silence of children safely
– Child sexual abuse: The numbers are shocking and demonstrate the magnitude of this problem. How do you assess the mechanisms that exist to deal with it?
-The numbers are indeed shocking and do not allow us any complacency. The incidents of child sexual abuse recorded every year show that we are not talking about isolated exceptions, but about a deep-rooted and complex problem, much of which still remains invisible.
At the level of mechanisms, Cyprus has an important legal and institutional framework. There is legislation, there is an obligation to report, there are specialized investigation units. But what our experience – and what the Office's campaign has highlighted – is that the existence of mechanisms is not always the same as their effective operation in practice.
The main weaknesses are identified in prevention, early detection and overall support of children after exposure. Many children are late or afraid to speak, either because they do not know where to turn, or because they do not feel that they will be adequately protected. This is exactly where we focus as an Office, on breaking the silence safely.
Our campaign highlighted something very clear: Dealing with sexual abuse cannot be limited to the moment of complaint and judicial investigation. There is a need for systematic education of children, parents and professionals, clear and accessible reporting mechanisms and, above all, stable psychosocial support for child victims over time.
The mechanisms exist, but they need to be strengthened, better coordinated and work with the child and not the process at the center. Because the real measure of success is not how many cases reach the courts, but how many children feel safe to speak out — and especially how many manage to heal their trauma.
February the filling of positions in the Office so that it can operate
-Your Office has been understaffed for a long time. How does this situation affect his work? Are actions being taken to strengthen?
-Understaffing affects the work of the Office on two very practical levels: Response time and depth of investigation.
When you have a limited scientific staff but manage a large volume of cases, your attention necessarily shifts to emergencies and "serious" incidents, and time is limited for preventive work, field interventions, systematic monitoring and evaluation of policies. This is not an excuse; it is an operational reality that needs correction.
In relation to preventive action and institutional influence, the Office of the Commissioner for the Protection of Children's Rights should not operate only in the context of "complaint management". It must be able to produce documentation, suggestions, trainings, implementation monitoring. When staffing is incomplete, preventive work becomes the first "victim", because it does not have the same time pressure as a "burning" incident.
To get a picture of the size: It has been publicly reported that the Office manages about 550 complaints per year, while a large part of the budget is absorbed by payroll, leaving limited space for actions/investigations/legal representation, etc.
In terms of recruitment/filling, positions have been announced (six positions on an A8 scale and one on an A11 scale). The first part of the process has been completed and from February 2, 2026, the six positions will be filled so that the Office can operate preventively, not just "firefighting".
The message is clear: Understaffing is a factor that directly affects the protection of rights. That's why staff reinforcement isn't just a request—it's a prerequisite for the Office to be able to respond quickly and consistently.
"3D and the basic principles of the contract"
Mrs. Pericleous chose to close our discussion by addressing the children herself. He noted:
«As Commissioner for the Protection of Children's Rights, I must conclude with a clear position of principle: I am on the side of the children. I am their institutional defender and their voice against the State.
I'm not "talking about children"; I convey, with full consciousness of responsibility, what they themselves experience, formulate and claim. So I want to send them a message:
Children, today you start from the "3D" and set in motion the four basic principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Justice that ensures non-discrimination and the best interests of the child (Articles 2 and 3).
The Right to Survival and Development (Article 6).
And Democracy (Article 12). The participation, listening and strengthening of the child's voice.
If we really want children to have a voice that is heard and taken seriously, then we must build their participation on the three E's of Involvement:
In Freedom, which means knowledge, access to information and non-manipulation – because "whoever is freely reasoned, is rightly reasoned".
Empowerment, i.e. providing the skills, tools and opportunities needed to participate meaningfully.
And to Responsibility, which does not concern children but us: Our obligation, as adults and as a State, to create safe and inclusive environments, where the rights of all children are protected and their voice can truly be heard."
